Thanks for posting this! I've had a look at it, and there's something I can't quite make sense of. I'm running SPSS 17.0. I've ran Friedman on my data (7 variables, 87 p's), which was significant, then ran your posthoc, as well as Wilcoxon paired analyses on each possible pair (21 in total) to compare results. The Wilcoxon paired analyses found only two pairs to be not significant (after .05/21 Bonferroni adjustment), but your analysis found one pair not significant using the Conover critical rank, and 12 pairs not significant using the Schaich & Hamerle critical rank. Some of these non-significant results in your analysis are coming up as extremely significant (p<.000000001) in the Wilcoxon analysis. I'm not sure why I'm finding such a vast difference in what is and isn't significant in to apparently similar analyses. Any suggestions?
More information about formatting options
University of Osnabrück
Germany / Europe
Phone: +43 650 4501586
Email: timo@gn[REMOVE THIS PART]ambs.at
© 1999-2013 Timo Gnambs.