search for: agrees

Dear R-list, I currently have to convert a data.frame with several factor-variables to a numeric matrix. Now the problem is, that the order of the factor-labels don't match the order I would like to use. for example, let's assume I have this factor-variable in my data-frame: x <- factor(rep(1:4, 5), labels=c("slightly disagree", "disagree", "agree",

Hello, I am attempting to create a bar plot that contains a range of possible response values on the x-axis of 1 to 5 and contains barplots for the number of responses even in the event that there are 0 responses. For example, I have a data set that contains values of 2, 3, 4, and 5 but I would also like my graph to show that there are no 1's. I have attached the resulting graph. The

Hi All, I produced a barplot and made a horizontal legend below the graph. Because the results are from a survey, there are three levels, namely strongly disagree/disagree, neutral and strongly agree/agree. > rownames(survey)[1] "Strongly disagree/disagree" "Neutral" "Strongly agree/agree" As in the output above, there is a large space

I am working on modifying a REDCap survey. The data dictionary column for the response field has the following value. 1, Strongly disagree | 2, Disagree | 3, Agree | 4, Strongly Agree | 5, Don't Know | 6, Refuse to Answer | 7, Not Applicable I am wanting to convert this so that it looks as follows: 1, A. Strongly disagree | 2, B. Disagree | 3, C. Agree | 4, D. Strongly Agree | 5, E.

Dear R users, I am a psychology postgraduate student who is relatively new to using R. I am currently developing a psychometric scale and have run into a few problems when using R to calculate a polychoric correlation matrix for my dataset. I am trying to produce a polychoric correlation matrix for calculating ordinal reliability estimates (eg. Alpha, omega).The set consists of 439 observations

Hi, When I look at the summary of an rpart object run on my data, I get 7 nodes but when I plot the rpart object, I get only 3 nodes. Should the number of nodes not match in the results of the 2 functions (summary and plot) or it is not always the same? Look forward to your reply, Carol -------------------------------------------- ?summary(rpart.res) Call: rpart(formula = mydata$class ~ ., data

##Q1. confint.glm(...) fails for an example of HSAUR data("womensrole", package = "HSAUR"); ## summary(womensrole); womensrole_glm_2 <- glm(fm2, data = womensrole,family = binomial()) ## summary(womensrole_glm_2); confint(womensrole_glm_2); ## -------Fail--------- # Waiting for profiling to be done... # Error in if (any(y < 0 | y > 1)) stop("y values must be 0

Dear Professor Fox, Apologies for my oversight relating to the polychor command and thank you for your advice. I turned to the polychor command when trying to find an equivalent for the polychoric command found in the psych package (I am following a procedure outlined in Gadermann, Guhn & Zumbo, 2012 that uses this command rather than the polycor package) . The polychoric command is returning

I am having trouble generating a graph. I want to know the % of respondents who answered that they "strongly agree" or "agree" the "America owes R's ethnic group a better chance" (BTTRCHNC) and I want to organize it by racial group (RACESHRT). "BTTRCHNC" is organized ordinally from 1 through 5 with 1=Strongly Agree, 5=Strongly Disagree

Removal of ans[nas] <- NA from the code of function 'ifelse' in R is not committed (yet). Why? -------------------------------------------- On Mon, 28/11/16, Martin Maechler <maechler at stat.math.ethz.ch> wrote: Subject: Re: [Rd] ifelse() woes ... can we agree on a ifelse2() ? Cc: R-devel at r-project.org, maechler at stat.math.ethz.ch Date: Monday, 28 November, 2016, 10:00

Hi all, I'm sure this is simple but I don't get it. I have a table mytable<-c(rep("Disagree",37),rep("Agree",64)) table(mytable) this gives me Agree Disagree 64 37 but I didn't ask for it to be in alphabetic order. How can I get it in original order? Disagree Agree 37 64 Thanks, Jeff Jeffrey. M. Miller, PhD

On Jun 28, 2016, at 12:55 PM, Chandler Carruth via Openmp-dev <openmp-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > I think I agree with Chris with 3.10 being the worst possible outcome. > > I'd be interested to understand why you or Chris thing 3.10 is the worst possible outcome. > > Chris has said it is because he thinks we'll never change the "3”, Yes, that is one reason.

Hi, I am wondering if anyone can suggest how to test the equality of 2 proportions. The caveat here is that the 2 proportions were calculated from the same number of samples using 2 different tests. So essentially we are comparing 2 accuracy rates from same, say 100, samples. I think this is like a paired test, but don't know if really we need to consider the "paired" nature of the

Hello: I need to create a six barplots from data that looks pretty close to what appears below. There are two grouping variables (age and gender) and three dependent variables for each grouping variables. I'm not really familiar with trellis graphics, perhaps there is something that can do what I need there, i don't know. The thing is: I *need* these to appear on one row, with some way

Hi, I have probably overlooked something obvious, but could anybody help me with following, please? Trying to make regression analysis. I have a huge dataframe with results from National Opinion Survey on Crime and Justice (www.abacon.com/fox/) with two variables G5 and N3 which are imported to R as ordered factors: > levels(noscj$G5) [1] "Strongly agree" "Agree"

Trying to install World of Warcraft on ubuntu 8.10, with the most recent version of wine, and I get to the end user license agreement, scroll all the way down, and I can't click agree on it to continue with installation. I'm using the download game client feature from my account on WorldofWarcraft.com, not the game CD's because I have a broken CD drive. If that helps any.

Hi Reid, > I agree that there could be more examples of JIT-based interpreters, and > I like your idea. When can you have it ready? :) soon, if you could just help me to get through some sticky places :) Agreed? (if "yes" then you could simply answer me privately and I will send you my concrete questions) Thank you. -- Valery.

> > As long as the committee remains unimportant, things will be fine. > > As soon as the committee becomes important, the LLVM project has already > > degenerated into a snake pit, and is likely to fork anyway. > > This sounds like an oxymoron, as if this policy only makes sense if > the non-representative foundation never tries to enforce it in a way > that the

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 01:29:13PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > So smp_mb() provides transitivity, as do pairs of smp_store_release() > and smp_read_acquire(), But they provide different grades of transitivity, which is where all the confusion lays. smp_mb() is strongly/globally transitive, all CPUs will agree on the order. Whereas the RCpc release+acquire is weakly so, only the two

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 01:29:13PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > So smp_mb() provides transitivity, as do pairs of smp_store_release() > and smp_read_acquire(), But they provide different grades of transitivity, which is where all the confusion lays. smp_mb() is strongly/globally transitive, all CPUs will agree on the order. Whereas the RCpc release+acquire is weakly so, only the two