Hi,
I am reviewing someone's study in which they used z-scores to standardize and compare data. I see no mention of their test for normality and when I looked at their raw data, I found much of it to be heavily skewed and not-normally distributed.
I need to determine whether this means the whole thing is junk, or if it is still a useful analysis, albeit not as valid as it would be if they had transformed the data (i.e., can/should I call it junk or is that an overstatement). Unfortunately, I do not have time to transform and re-run myself.
Thanks!
I am reviewing someone's study in which they used z-scores to standardize and compare data. I see no mention of their test for normality and when I looked at their raw data, I found much of it to be heavily skewed and not-normally distributed.
I need to determine whether this means the whole thing is junk, or if it is still a useful analysis, albeit not as valid as it would be if they had transformed the data (i.e., can/should I call it junk or is that an overstatement). Unfortunately, I do not have time to transform and re-run myself.
Thanks!