Personality and Popularity in the Speakeasy (A Study!)

[Iecerint]

/in

[Iecerint]

multiple regression is extremely easu using r i really should have done it near the very beginning of my data analysis
i think in general out of laziness of a lack of imagination i've stuck too closely to basic linear analyses when there's a lot more really cool statistics i can try out

Try doing polynomial regression on a few indicators maybe.

All you have to do is center the variable, then add a regressor that's the square (or cube, etc., but it gets hard to interpret after cubes) of the centered indicator. The polynomial is important if the squared regressor is significant.

With personality indicators for some variables there's a "sweet spot" that's ideal whereas the extremes are pathologic. If that's true about popularity, then at least testing a polynomial regression model is probably really important for model specification.

[Iecerint]

I'd really like the SE 6000 word thing you wrote (or just the words that it grabs for me). I wanted to do the IBM thing before, but I don't really use Twitter or anything, so it's hard to get 6000 words that aren't theses.

[Iecerint]

Speakeasy has a thread whose sole purpose is as a dumping ground for angst, so it makes sense that depression would be overrepresented.

[Iecerint]

Speakeasy has a thread whose sole purpose is as a dumping ground for angst, so it makes sense that depression would be overrepresented.

I'd argue that's the sole purpose of the entire speakeasy.

All the more reason.

[Iecerint]

2. What type of people are drawn into playing mafia?

*NT*'s mostly.

*looks up*

Seems legit

Idk I think it'd be interesting to see who gets what results on Meyers Briggs, and then apply that to mafia and each persons playstyle. So like... I'm INFP (T), whatever that added T is supposed to mean. And that certainly seems to corrolate with me being an oddball and being completely illogical and evaluating based on emotion and reading tea leaves?

Idk

Psyche I'm sorry for offtopic-ing your thread, your personality test is better pls continue

Big 5 maps pretty OK onto MB tbh. Depends on what you consider "good enough"

Extraversion is E>I obviously.
Agreeableness is T<F.
Conscientiousness is J>P (with a loading on T>F too).
Openness is S<N (but also with small loadings on everything).
Neuroticism doesn't map to anything.

[Iecerint]

so i actually told my professor about this and he suggested factor analysis
he also said this stuff was publishable (though not in a journal of psychology) but maybe he wouldn't have if he knew all the ethical issues surrounding how i got my data hahahahahaha

Yeah, factor analysis would be even better.

Basically if regression is y = mx + b in algebra, structural modeling is when you did systems of equations in algebra.

[Iecerint]

wouldn't that be multiple regression

No, multiple regression is when you have like

y = mx + nz + b

But they start using beta for all the coefficients to make it less confusing because they're not ordered.

But it's all one equation. Structural modeling is like:

Y = mx + b
x = betaD + betaE + betacoeff

You can make equations that predict the predictors.

Factor analysis can either be totally data driven in which case it's just principal component analysis plus a rotation (which is a silly math toy) or theoretically specified and hypothesis-tested, in which case you do something conceptually like the above.

[Iecerint]

Are the %s loadings or what? Trying to figure out how you can have low neuroticism and high scores on all the indicators.

[Iecerint]

I wonder what feature of Twitter users makes us all 99% for Openness.