Mann-Whitney U Test: p=1.0 - Should I Report z = 0.0001?

  • Thread starter Thread starter nobahar
  • Start date Start date
nobahar
Messages
482
Reaction score
2
Hey everyone,
I got z = 0, and therefore p = 1.0 in a Mann-Whitney U test. Considering this is impossible, should I instead report z = 0.0001 and p = 0.99?
Also, I have a different number of participants in my two conditions, I ran a parametric independent samples t-test, does anyone know if SPSS (the program I used) corrects for this?
Thanks in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't think SPSS sorts for that.

How have you entered your data in SPSS, since that might sometimes do the trick. You might just have entered it the wrong way. Try to transpose your data and see what SPSS then comes up with if you do the same...
 
Thanks for the reply sander.
I can’t remember how I entered it into SPSS as it was awhile ago now. I 'remember' (for what episodic memory is worth!) making several attempts. I normally do. I also did the calculations by hand (as was standard unless there was a lot of participants, in which case its far to laborious and more prone to errors). If I recall, it came close to z=0, but wasn't quite so; would this make sense? I'm pretty sure SPSS simply took it to be z=0, when it clearly couldn't have been.
I think I resolved to put P=0.99 on the assignment.
 
nobahar said:
Thanks for the reply sander.
I can’t remember how I entered it into SPSS as it was awhile ago now. I 'remember' (for what episodic memory is worth!) making several attempts. I normally do. I also did the calculations by hand (as was standard unless there was a lot of participants, in which case its far to laborious and more prone to errors). If I recall, it came close to z=0, but wasn't quite so; would this make sense? I'm pretty sure SPSS simply took it to be z=0, when it clearly couldn't have been.
I think I resolved to put P=0.99 on the assignment.

Hmmm now that's odd. SPSS is some weird stuff, it works just totally against your instincts.

I think resolving the problem by saying p=0.99 doesn't solve the problem...

It might be that your data is rounded, which might just make the difference between 0.99 and 1.00. SPSS usually uses 2.2 significance. (ie 12.34 -> 12.3456 will become 1.36).
 
Namaste & G'day Postulate: A strongly-knit team wins on average over a less knit one Fundamentals: - Two teams face off with 4 players each - A polo team consists of players that each have assigned to them a measure of their ability (called a "Handicap" - 10 is highest, -2 lowest) I attempted to measure close-knitness of a team in terms of standard deviation (SD) of handicaps of the players. Failure: It turns out that, more often than, a team with a higher SD wins. In my language, that...
Hi all, I've been a roulette player for more than 10 years (although I took time off here and there) and it's only now that I'm trying to understand the physics of the game. Basically my strategy in roulette is to divide the wheel roughly into two halves (let's call them A and B). My theory is that in roulette there will invariably be variance. In other words, if A comes up 5 times in a row, B will be due to come up soon. However I have been proven wrong many times, and I have seen some...

Similar threads

Back
Top