Woops, I had my maths wrong due to there being two entries for RCT
The correct entries are:
Ike | 36.36% |
Wright | 14.29% |
White | 41.67% |
RCT | 40.00% |
Cone | 19.05% |
Hylian | 50.00% |
Outlaw | -5.00% |
Noname | 75.00% |
Spurge | 68.89% |
Nickels | 42.53% |
Smeags | 47.37% |
Sparks | 15.27% |
Khan | 30.00% |
padib | 39.47% |
stdev= 21%
1st ST= 35.5-+21
RANGE=(14.5 to 56.5)
Ike
White
RCT
Cone
Hlian
Nickels
Smeags
Sparks
Khan
Padib
Using improvement only, we'll just look at the upside
RANGE 35.5 + 21
White
RCT
Hylian
Nickels
Smeags
Padib
Ike
Sparks
These players above have seen statistically significant improvement because of my presence. Basically, I gave the players above things to talk about and reasons to contribute whether it be attacking me or answering questions
Looking at the downside
RANGE 35.5 - 21
Cone
Khan
These players haven't improved as much as the average, due to my presence. Basically, these players haven't increased in quality along as much as the rest. My input made them less talkative. These are clams, due to my talking.
Total deviation:
Spurge
Noname
These players showed improvement with likely little affect from myself. Good sign.
Wright
Outlaw
These players showed very little improvement with likely little affect from myself. These are your clams, and they're clammed with or without me. As I said in the previous post, I didn't think I had any effect on wright, and the numbers support me on that idea.