[Feature Request]: ANOVA for two or more dependent variables

[romanogino]

Description

JASP 0.95 only have one dependent variable. I need two or more groups.

Purpose

No response

Use-case

No response

Is your feature request related to a problem?

No response

Is your feature request related to a JASP module?

ANOVA

Describe the solution you would like

That more dependent variables can be added, not only one.

Describe alternatives that you have considered

MANOVA, but it is unsatisfactory.

Additional context

As reference, with SPSS:

[EJWagenmakers]

I am confused -- it seems to me you are requesting a MANOVA, but then you explicitly say this is not what you are after

[tomtomme]

@romanogino
can you give more details on what exactly you need maybe including a jasp file with a small sample data set?

[TarandeepKang]

Hi All,

Forgive my interruption, but I have found the comparable dialogue box in the English version of SPSS and this is in fact for the one-way ANOVA. SPSS gives you the option to specify multiple dependent variables in its one-way ANOVA? Is this what you're asking for? This will allow one to compute multiple separate one-way ANOVA's at the same time, but surely the ideal analysis for this situation is the multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) as EJ has suggested? The MANOVA is already is in JASP, and a post hoc test could certainly also be useful #1765. It would be great if you could indeed provide more detail on why this isn't ideal for your situation and the data you want to analyse? Let's hope we can get to the bottom of this!

Best,

Tarandeep

[romanogino]

Students usually use SPSS because of its graphical advantages and the absence of distortion when copying and pasting. They also compare SPSS with JASP, and recommendations arise from there. Statistics specialists know the options and criteria for statistical tests, but students are largely guided by YouTube or whatever they find easiest. Actually, MANOVA can be used to perform the analysis. It was just a suggestion. I'm going to close the post because it's not a priority nor urgent. Thanks again.

[tomtomme]

@romanogino
thx for the explanation. It is a valid feature request. A similar request was made in the past here #2463 as a reference.