Talk:Dependent and independent variables/Archive 1

of experiments|experimental design]], an independent variable is a random variable used to define treatment groups. " As it contradicted the rest of the definition and seems to be reffering to control and treatment cases rather than an independent variable (the actual treatment).. This is the one that you change in your experiment...

Suggestion

It would be good to say that the dependent variable is sometimes called the abscissa and the independent variable the ordinate with links to those terms. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dyermeister (talk • contribs) 04:46, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Put a big

Y [Dependent Variable] = f(X [Indepndent Variable(s)], C) so that someone can quickly remember which is which. See regression page for reference

Examples

I took out the saliva example — it was confusing and explained nothing that the other examples hadn't already elucidated. Also took out the numbering, as it doesn't seem to be the standard and I couldn't see a real reason for it.

Someone is having a problem with an over amount of saliva build up. The saliva build up would be the dependent variable. The dependant variable will change according to how to independent variable is used on it. The drug given to a person for their saliva problem, will be the independent variable. The independent variable can be changed in terms of (dosage, amount, frequency, intake, etc.) So with the proper amount of the independent variable, the dependent variable will change for the better, or perhaps worse if all goes wrong. The independent variable acts as a catalyst which alters the current state of the saliva build up within the individual's body.

--Mgreenbe 12:45, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Does this article have any merit at all? Is there any meaning to the term outside the formal mathematical and statistical senses? Dsol 15:20, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

yes it does! sorted out my son's homework! Maxhotty (talk) 21:41, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

I don't think there's any meaning outside of mathematics/statistics, but isn't that merit enough for the article? My understanding is that a number of pages link here. Most of them seem to be coming from social sciences and want the statistical definition, but titration, lagrange multipliers, and parametric derivative point to this page, also.

What it could use is a rigorous definition — something better than a "catalyst", harhar. If you don't do it, I will eventually. --Mgreenbe 16:17, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Agreed. I'll try to get to it soon, though I'm quite busy lately (among other things, with statistics). The article I'm seeing would mention the concept in a brief intuitive way in the intro, and be first of all about the definition in probability (with discrete, continuous, and maybe measure theoretic expressions). Then it would go on to statistics (technically not part of mathematics), and talk about various tests of independence, with links. Finally, it would mention common non-technical uses of the term, and the relations to cause and effect. Dsol 15:15, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

I've reinstated a bunch of content that was lost in a few vandalism attempts. For better flow, I've also rearranged that content. I've added another example too, which came out more complicated and less smoothly than I hoped. LightYear 05:27, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Scientific Method

Has anyone else read Scientific method? I could only skim it as I do not have enough time to read it but is this page included in it? I could not find it.PatPeter 01:23, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

I do not have enough time to read this article on your behalf. However, I do have a web browser with an Edit | Find facility. ... and, yes, that article does not mention this article. Ian Cairns 04:16, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Statistical vs Scientific Usage

As I just added a link to Design of experiments, I realised again that there is an ambiguity of purpose in this page. The definition of independent variable in the statistical world is different (but not contradictory) to the scientific definition. Since this page now links to pages concerning the scientific and the statistical method, I suggest that there should be a more deliberation seperation of definition and treatment. There are elements common to both fields, but the emphasis is separable, and an acknowledgement of this would make the connection between the linked pages clearer. LightYear 00:04, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Static vs. Active Indpendent Variable

I was frustrated in not being able to find accurate definitions for either term online. The following is a fairly simple explanation:

A static independent variable includes factors of which change is not expected from, such as age or ethnicity. An active independent variable however is dynamic and can be manipulated, such as the dosage of a particular medication. Although the static independent variable cannot be manipulated, both the static and active independent variable could have an effect on the outcome (dependent variable). MontielMoreno 19:03, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

mess

I'll be back later, but some brief comments:

This article is a mess. It begins by suggesting that the design-of-experiments usage is the principal topic of the article. That is ridiculous. Then it treats the usage that everyone learns in high school, and it gives a stupid definition by non-essentials: the variable plotted on the x-axis. That's what you'd expect to be written by someone who doesn't know anything beyond what everyone is taught in high school.

Also, there should be a conspicuous link to statistical independence, since that is where the topic of independent random variables is treated.

I'll be back...... Michael Hardy 18:53, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

OK, now I've reorganized it and put first things first. Michael Hardy 23:32, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I copyedited one short paragraph, the example on drug dose and symptoms. It's not necessary to use "dosages" instead of "doses" etc. I also removed extraneous words that detract from the basic message. Eperotao 19:44, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

the symbol

The symbol used to present independence should be presented. Jackzhp (talk) 18:43, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

is when you do a avarible you describe in a certan —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.214.238.31 (talk) 00:29, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Persistant Vandalism

Anyone maintaining this article will be aware that the page history is mostly vandalism and reverts. This has been going on for at least a few months. Not only is this a lot of work for the maintainers, it ultimately affects the quality of the article.

The unwanted edits seem to be mostly from many different IPs, generally resolving to ADSL accounts belonging to sbcglobal, swbell, comcast, etc. Given the article's topic is not controversial, not popular and not risque, I suppose the editors are experimenting school students.

Apart from adding the page to Wikipedia:Most_vandalized_pages, what other strategies might we use to lighten the load? I'd suggest that preventing edits from anonymous users would stop a large proportion of the abuse. LightYear (talk) 04:31, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

The only strategy I see is semi-protection, and given that IP edits are almost all vandalism, the price is in my opinion worth paying. Thus, I semi-protected it indefinitely. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 22:03, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Which is which

Based on what happens to the independent variable, that is what changes the dependent variable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by B DUB PLAYA (talk • contribs) 02:41, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

{{editsemiprotected}}

The Definition of a Regressor

Take, for example, a linear regression analysis formula:

Y_i=b₀+b₁X_1i+...+b_nX_ni+u_i

A regressor is defined as the independent variable used to explain the dependent variable. So in this case, a regressor is one of the terms like b₁X_1i .

The regressand is the "y" value (dependent variable)

One could argue that "the regression" is defined as the total computation of the independent variables, in this case "b₀+b₁X_1i+...+b_nX_ni+u_i" —Preceding unsigned comment added by DaveUCSD (talk • contribs) 14:55, 22 April 2009

Not done: Could you resubmit your request in a "please change X to Y" format, please? If you want to add a section, you need to tell where in the article it fits. In either case, you should provide a reference for this information. Thanks. Celestra (talk) 23:52, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

A suggestion for improved clarity

It says

The terms "dependent variable" and "independent variable" are used in similar but subtly different ways in mathematics and statistics as part of the standard terminology in those subjects. They are used to distinguish between two types of quantities being considered, separating them into those available at the start of a process and those being created by it, where the latter (dependent variables) are dependent on the former (independent variables).[citation needed]

I think there are plenty of people who understand the concept of Dependent and independent variables but are confused by the terminology. Which is the cause, the Dependent or Independent Variable? Which is the effect, the Dependent or Independent Variable?

If people have trouble with the terminology (but not the concept) it is something like asking someone to put things in alphabetical order when they do not know the order of the "English alphabet" in the first place. What is the best way to do this? Suggestions, anyone? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikkrockiana (talk • contribs) 17:45, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

xouns says: — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xouns (talk • contribs) 09:46, 26 January 2012 (UTC) I came here for the same reason: the terminology confuses me. What about saying something like: "The independent variables are what you manipulate in an experiment, the dependent variables are what you measure." Following this, I would put in something like "In other words, the independent variables would be on the X-axis and the dependent on the Y-axis of a graph, or the dependent variables are dependent on the independent variable during the experiment." That would make it clearer to me at least.

Using vitamin C as an example

Perhaps a better example could be used which is more straightforward. The article makes it sound as though vitamin C prolongs life which it does not. How about the effect of temperature on the sound of a cricket. Or some other simple example. EtherDoc (talk) 01:06, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Article needs improvement

The article is written in such a way to be very confusing for the common masses of people as they will have difficulty getting a clear understanding of what these two word groupings mean based on how they are explained. 'Dependent' and 'Independent' variables are commonly used in psychology and other sciences, not just mathematics.

Machn (talk) 03:51, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Welcome to math articles on WikiPedia. I'll see what I can do.

JSoules (talk) 06:00, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

hi: i am looking for the definitions of dependent and independent variables in the context on non statistical (experimental designs) and the distinctions of qualitative and quantitative data... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.192.149.108 (talk) 20:27, 8-31-2010 (UTC)

Edit request from 196.207.44.240, 14 August 2011

196.207.44.240 (talk) 07:41, 14 August 2011 (UTC) under simple example, the following can be used,

A vehicle manufacturer forecasts that they will need to produce 200 cars for a period. The vehicles will require 800 tyres . The tyres become the dependant variable, and the cars the independant variable.

Not done: There's already an example, do we need another one? — Bility (talk) 18:25, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Terms to be linked

"Extraneous variables" etc. should be linked to corresponding Wikipedia entries. --Parodi (talk) 12:15, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

common-method variance

The term common-method variance might be linked here. 85.179.138.248 (talk) 22:19, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Dependent variables are also known as "criterion" variables

Just thought I'd put it out there.

64.179.153.46 (talk) 01:24, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

In statistics

I'm not fully happy with the statement "In a statistics experiment, the dependent variable is the event studied and expected to change whenever the independent variable is altered." Isn't it rather so that dependent/independent variables refer to the variables in the regression model used to fit the results? Here is an IMO better explanation: [1] One should be cautious with dictionaries as references. Isheden (talk) 10:12, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 April 2015

A independent variable is wrong. should be an independent 24.112.75.202 (talk) 14:37, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Done, thanks! --ElHef (Meep?) 14:43, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 July 2015

Please change all instances of "modelling" to "modeling" (it should be one L) as it is misspelled. Mouse1999 (talk) 04:11, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Not done: It isn't misspelled; it's the British spelling of the word. See Grammarist, Oxford Dictionaries. In accordance with our relevant Manual of Style guideline, we should keep these national varieties of English consistent, and they shouldn't be changed without a compelling reason and/or a consensus to do so. For more information please read Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Spelling. Thank you. Mz7 (talk) 06:56, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

What is "regressor""  ?

"Regressor"redirects here.

So, what is it ? I know a lot about regression and how it works. But I might not known some of the insider mumbo-jumbo used by experts in a field different to mine.

"Regressor" is not mentioned on this page. So, what is it ? Why does it redirect here ?Lathamibird (talk) 22:23, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dependent and independent variables. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140210002634/http://1xltkxylmzx3z8gd647akcdvov.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/rapidminer-5.0-manual-english_v1.0.pdf to http://1xltkxylmzx3z8gd647akcdvov.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/rapidminer-5.0-manual-english_v1.0.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:50, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

simple concepts should have simple explanations

This is one of the most basic concepts not just in math, but in the human experience. It is absurd that the density of and language used in this article makes it seem like something to learn and not just a name for something people fundamentally understand to begin with. I have this same issue with every math article on Wikipedia, but I really think in the case of something this fundamental it's really absurd. How can we expect someone who doesn't already have a basic background in mathematics to read this article and come away with an understanding of the terms? I am going to try to do better but I am begging those of you who participate broadly in editing math pages on wikipedia to try to remember who uses Wikipedia and cater to them at least a little bit.

Tkondrashov (talk) 17:52, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Mathematicians also use these pages, and unfortunately, formalizing concepts in math is often hard. So, even if the articles could be made somewhat more accessible for the layman, the article will necessarily be somewhat technical. – OfficialURL (talk) 19:51, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

I think it is unreasonable to be worried that mathematicians will need a reference for what a dependent variable is. I think it is reasonable to expect that many more people who are not mathematicians will benefit from learning what a dependent variable is. Formalizing concepts in math is very easy, since math literally is formal by definition. Making them understandable to humans is what's hard, and what's important on Wikipedia. Thank you to the contributors who have made improvements in this since my comment! Tkondrashov (talk) 14:07, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Partially agreed. The introductory paragraphs were insufficient, leading the reader to see the other sections, which are more mathematically complex. I tried to improve the introductory paragraphs to be simpler. (I don't think the other sections require a simpler language, only the introductory part) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Walwal20 (talk • contribs) 00:17, 8 July 2020 (UTC)