| Abstract: | Responds to comments made by D. R. Harris, C. T. Bisbee, and S. H. Evans (see record 1971-09169-001) on the original article "Note on Evans and Anastasio on the Analysis of Covariance," by D. A. Sprott (see record 1970-09565-001), which corrected data in the article by S. H. Evans and L. J. Anastasio (see record 1968-09688-001). The purpose of the current author's note was to show that there is no substitute for thought. The analysis of covariance, even when treatment and covariate are correlated, can be useful and valid when in the hands of a scientist who knows his data, knows what he is doing, and is prepared to think about the interpretation of his analyses. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved) |
