-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 48
Fixed covariance coverage subsection warning and NAs in the group observations from read.Models() #209
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
jenniferdguay
wants to merge
3
commits into
michaelhallquist:master
Choose a base branch
from
jenniferdguay:master
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Fixed covariance coverage subsection warning and NAs in the group observations from read.Models() #209
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If we specify group labels (e.g., G1 and G2) in “GROUPING =“ of the model syntax, mplus knows how to label the levels in the grouping variable of the dataset (e.g., G1 refers to 1 and G2 refers to 2). The output does not print group levels in parenthesis (e.g., the (1) in Group G1 (1)) and the original code from mplusAutomation works.
So if we specify the model syntax with group labels (e.g., G1 and G2) in "GROUPING =", for instance:
The original code can be used:
Whereas if we do not specify group labels in "Grouping =", but specify the number of levels in the group variable:
Then the original code produces an error because it does not account for the group levels in parenthesis (e.g., (1) and (2) that have been printed next to G1 and G2 in the output). In this case, the proposed changes work:
Thus, it could be good to check if group labels have been added in “Grouping =” argument, so that the original code can be used to parse the output, otherwise the proposed changes can be used.