View source: R/assumptionCheck.R
assumptionCheck | R Documentation |
Checks some basic assumptions about the suitability of network analysis on your data
assumptionCheck(
data,
type = c("network", "impact"),
percent = 20,
split = c("median", "mean", "forceEqual", "cutEqual", "quartiles"),
plot = FALSE,
binary.data = FALSE,
na.rm = TRUE
)
data |
dataframe or matrix of observational data (rows: observations, columns: nodes) |
type |
which assumptions to check? "network" tests the suitability for network analysis in general. "impact" tests the suitability for analyzing impact |
percent |
percent difference from grand mean that is acceptable when comparing variances. |
split |
if type="impact", specifies the type of split to utilize |
plot |
logical. Should histograms each variable be plotted? |
binary.data |
logical. Defaults to FALSE |
na.rm |
logical. Should missing values be removed? |
Network analysis rests on several assumptions. Among these: - Variance of each node is (roughly) equal - Distributions are (roughly) normal
Comparing networks in impact rests on additional assumptions including: - Overall variances are (roughly) equal in each half
This function checks these assumptions and notifies any violations. This function is not intended as a substitute for careful data visualization and independent assumption checks.
See citations in the references section for further details.
Terluin, B., de Boer, M. R., & de Vet, H. C. W. (2016). Differences in Connection Strength between Mental Symptoms Might Be Explained by Differences in Variance: Reanalysis of Network Data Did Not Confirm Staging. PLOS ONE, 11(11), e0155205. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0155205
Add the following code to your website.
For more information on customizing the embed code, read Embedding Snippets.