Wording used in the description of the experiment

You write that you have three options or three modes in the experiment (each temperature is a variant or mode of the experiment).

In English-mode or condition

Thank you. However. When describing an experiment, it is not always sufficient to specify the conditions; sometimes it is necessary to specify the subjects of the experiment: the" group "of experimental animals, the "category", etc.For example, in one of the English-language publications, the phrase"age classes of females" is used. It is about "groups" that my question is about, and not about the factors of the experiment.

You write that you have three options or three modes in the experiment (each temperature is a variant or mode of the experiment).

In English - mode or condition

I will add to my previous post - what you write about is the factors of the experiment. My question, I repeat, is about the subjects of the experiment - about experimental animals

For more details, I give examples:

Search query 1

Search query 2

Search query 3

but it's very fuzzy. You may have a 25C variant in your experiment and there are 150 flies. 5 of them are sitting in a group.

If you need to generally indicate all 150 flies in this mode, then I would say "flies from the 25C mode behaved so-and-so", "at a temperature of 25C, molting occurred synchronously", "in the 25C variant, insects reproduced well".

We can also talk about age classes. This is a specific subset. But not the group yet.

Understood, thank you

yes, at least whatever you call it, the main thing is that the experiment was not meaningless.
Sample 1, sample 2, sample 3.
Animals from experimental group 1, experimental group 2, control group.

yes, at least whatever you call it, the main thing is that the experiment was not meaningless.
Sample 1, sample 2, sample 3.
Animals from experimental group 1, experimental group 2, control group.

I don't agree. This is not a sample. The sample will be the ENTIRE population of individuals in all modes.

You shouldn't call it an experienced group either.

And the question of terminology is very important.

I don't agree. This is not a sample. The sample will be the ENTIRE population of individuals in all modes.

Well, here I already doubted whether to agree with you (or with the authors of textbooks that say the opposite of your statement).

Let's say we perform an analysis of variance. It is a fact that in the analysis of variance and in mathematical statistics, applied to the experiment, it is the group of subjects who say it. As well as the fact that in the analysis of variance" say " between the group and within the group variance. But that's not the point. With regard to insects, you may be right, due to the subtleties you outlined above. But in relation to laboratory rodents, to groups of subjects in the framework of a psychological experiment, your argument about the grouping of flies is doubtful to me. This is confirmed by specific formulations in scientific articles and textbooks. I digress a little. So, back to where I started, let's say we do a variance analysis. Let's say we repeat the experiment at each gradation of the factor (at each temperature) three times. If I'm not confusing anything, the sample is the number of test subjects (experimental animals) within each one repetition within each one gradation. And so on three times, since there are three repetitions. Don't let the phrase "sample from the general population"confuse you here.

Analysis of variance

The italics in the quote below are not mine, but the author's:

Analysis of variance

but it's very fuzzy. You may have a 25C variant in your experiment and there are 150 flies. 5 of them are sitting in a group.

If you need to generally indicate all 150 flies in this mode, then I would say "flies from the 25C mode behaved so-and-so", "at a temperature of 25C, molting occurred synchronously", "in the 25C variant, insects reproduced well".

When writing a scientific report or publication, it is quite possible to formulate the type: a group of insects located at such and such a temperature. That is, it is indicated that we are talking about a certain number of insects that are in a closed vessel, and the vessel, in turn, is in the thermostat at a certain temperature. Whereas there locally in the vessel insects gather in separate subgroups is not significant for determining the final target parameters of the experiment

It is also possible to formulate in one phrase at the beginning of the description of the experiment: "by group we will mean a fixed number of insects placed in a closed vessel."

I am not writing this in the sense that I am trying to refute you, uw. Musolin, I am looking forward to your counterarguments and in no way exclude that I am mistaken. I think there is a useful discussion going on.

There is some difference in terms of ecological experiment and statistical mathematicians. Inter-group variance is, yes, a statistical term. But all rats at 25C will not be called a group.

Yes, probably, the sample is ALL the test subjects (not their number, but themselves) (experimental animals) within each one repetition within each one gradation. I was referring to the case where there is only one repetition. As such, each sample should reflect the properties of the general population.

"When writing a scientific report or publication, it is quite possible to use a phrase like: a group of insects located at such and such a temperature." - so you can, yes. But you can also omit the word "group" altogether

"That is, it is indicated that we are talking about a certain number of insects that are in a closed vessel, and the vessel, in turn, is in the thermostat at a certain temperature. Whereas there, insects gather locally in the vessel in separate subgroups is not significant for determining the final target parameters of the experiment" - here it is important that you clearly explain that you mean ALL the insects in this version of the experiment, and not some part (group) of them.

"It is also possible at the beginning of the description of the experiment to formulate in one phrase:" by group we will mean a fixed number of insects placed in a closed vessel." -- yes, but not fixed (30), but all (because someone can die, and from 30 it will become 29, i.e. not fixed.

"I am not writing this in the sense that I am trying to refute you, uw. Musolin, I am looking forward to your counterarguments and in no way exclude that I am mistaken. I think there is a useful discussion going on. "-- yes, of course. Having worked for many years in experimental entomology, I do not remember any articles with the word group in this sense. In English. they also write "experimental cohort" (just don't write to anyone "uv."/ " with uv.", even in a letter - - - this saves 2.5 seconds, but it looks terrible

.. IMHO, it is better not to focus on terminology, but on observing assumptions, since we chose the classic ANOVA. But we will believe that the author honestly did it, and everything is OK. I've never been so lucky in my life, though.

And what did you mean by that?

And what did you mean by that?

If what I have quoted is out of place (I do not exclude this), then I have to clarify-what did you want to say with your remark quoted by me in my previous post in this topic ?

What he wanted, he said, clearly and clearly, without quoting lengthy phrases. But how your screenshots respond to my post is completely unclear. Scientific discussion does not tolerate significant hints.