0
$\begingroup$

I often see the claim that post-hoc power is nonsense. However, it is unclear what the post-hoc power they criticize is.

My Question
What is the post-hoc power in the following experiment?

Experiment:
We randomly divide 20 animals into two groups, Group A and Group B. After that, for Group A, Foods A are fed, and for Group B, Foods B are fed. After a certain period, bodyweight was measured, and the data were as follows.

Group_A :40.2, 40.4, 40.6, 40.8, 41.0, 41.2, 41.4, 41.6, 41.8
Group_B :30.1, 30.3, 30.5, 30.7, 30.9, 31.1, 31.3, 31.5, 31.7, 31.9, 32.1

I would like to conduct a two-sided test with a significance level of 0.05 to see if there is a significant difference between the two groups.

I think it is one of the following ones. Both codes are written in "R". R source codes can be downloaded from the following link.

Method 1

#Load data Group_A = c(40.2, 40.4, 40.6, 40.8, 41.0, 41.2, 41.4, 41.6, 41.8) Group_B = c(30.1, 30.3, 30.5, 30.7, 30.9, 31.1, 31.3, 31.5, 31.7, 31.9, 32.1) # Welch Two Sample t-test t.test(Group_A,Group_B) library(effsize) library(pwr) cd = cohen.d(Group_A, Group_B) cd pwr.t2n.test(n1 = 9, n2= 11, d = cd$estimate, sig.level = 0.05, power = NULL, alternative = c("two.sided")) 

Method 2

# Load data Group_A = c(40.2, 40.4, 40.6, 40.8, 41.0, 41.2, 41.4, 41.6, 41.8) Group_B = c(30.1, 30.3, 30.5, 30.7, 30.9, 31.1, 31.3, 31.5, 31.7, 31.9, 32.1) # Welch Two Sample t-test twel=t.test(Group_A,Group_B) twel pwel=twel$p.value library(effsize) library(pwr) cd = cohen.d(Group_A, Group_B) cd pwr.t2n.test(n1 = 9, n2= 11, d = cd$estimate, sig.level = pwel, power = NULL, alternative = c("two.sided")) 

Which is the “correct” post-hoc power calculation code?

Notes:
If your "R" environment does not have packages named "effsize" and "pwr", you need to install them previously. If the following command is executed on R while connected to the Internet, installation should start automatically.

install.packages("effsize") install.packages("pwr") 

P.S. I'm not very good at English, so I'm sorry if I have some impolite or unclear expressions. I welcome any corrections and English review. (You can edit my question and description to improve them)

$\endgroup$
4
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I don't know the answer to this question, but the English is totally fine. $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 1, 2019 at 0:59
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ I think you will get more interesting responses at stats.stackexchange.com our sister-site dedicated to statistics (also it deserves to be better known). I flagged for 'automatic transfer' $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 2, 2019 at 9:50
  • $\begingroup$ @spaceisdarkgreen Thank you for checking my English. $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 4, 2019 at 12:58
  • $\begingroup$ @ Vincent Thank you for the advice. Thank you for creating a link for cross-validation. Please tell me where the link to my page is in "Cross Validation"? $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 4, 2019 at 13:02

0

You must log in to answer this question.

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.