Hello again Mite and company,
I’m a little confused about the fdr values that are shown when I look at group comparisons of nodal measures. I’m comparing two groups using weighted undirected graphs with anticorrelations set to zero and I have noticed that the fdr(1-tailed) and fdr(2-tailed) are the same across all of the regions.
I’m guessing that these do NOT reflect fdr-corrected p-values, but maybe represent the cutoff for significance after fdr correction–is that correct?
In other words, if the p(2-tailed) for global efficiency is .002 and the fdr(2-tailed) = .012, would it be correct to interpret that as a significant result (i.e., global efficiency for this region is significantly different between my groups)? On the other hand, if global efficiency = .02, the result would not be significant because the value is greater than the fdr of .012?
If all of that is correct, what does it mean when the fdr value is 0? Is that simply telling me there are no significant results for that measure after fdr correction?
Yes, your conclusions that you mentioned above are correct. In fact, we discussed these issues with the p-values and fdr correction table in another post. There, I offered a detailed explanation about how to interpret the fdr values shown in the tables in Braph: