You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Currently, if let's say effect_type arg is left to default ("correlation") and we change the test_method to that of a mean difference test, it errors. However, I wonder whether it would be simpler to just have the effect_type adjust automatically based on the input of test_method, especially in straightforward cases like correlations and t-tests?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Dear @DominiqueMakowski thanks for pointing out this issue. Initially, we wanted to be sure that the user was aware of the effect type considered; so it was required to specify both the effect_type and test_method argument. However, we agree that this is redundant and most of the times it ends up with annoying error messages. Now, following your suggestion, we let the effect type to be set automatically and the user is required to define only the test method.
At the moment the changes are in the develop branch. We will merge everything in the master branch after the review process.
Related to openjournals/joss-reviews#2810 :
Currently, if let's say
effect_type
arg is left to default ("correlation") and we change thetest_method
to that of a mean difference test, it errors. However, I wonder whether it would be simpler to just have the effect_type adjust automatically based on the input of test_method, especially in straightforward cases like correlations and t-tests?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: