The results I reported should have read (t(6) = -1.44, p = 0.2). This does not change the conclusion of the analysis.

]]>Hey, I didn’t know you were a Braves fan!

]]>Add the digits of this p-value and you get 13. Yes, it’s unlikely that the sum of the digits of the p-value, taken to three significant figures, will be prime—but the result is not statistically significant at the 5% level. Therefore the null hypothesis is true, and the planned Ted talk will have to be canceled until further notice.

]]>0.632, 0.109, 0.131, 0.112, 0.206, 0.349, 0.850

If there were no age effect, these should follow a uniform(0,1) distribution, which has a mean of 0.5. But the mean of these p-values is 0.34, and significantly less than 0.5 (t(6) = 3.09, p = 0.02). Looks like there’s a 98% chance that the “ages ending in -9” hypothesis is true after all!

]]>