But the problem with R-squared in this case is that a linear model isn't appropriate for ordinal data. These rankings are ordered categories, not numbers.
The comment I was replying to was not about ordinal data and I stand by it in its context.
But on your point, the Jury's still out on what to do with Likert-type data like this. Purists do say that it's ordinal and therefore you can't do any numeric analysis on it, but practically speaking you can learn a lot from it by treating it as interval data.
In my opinion, statistical analysis like this is ALWAYS two parts speculation and one part science (if you're lucky). It's designed to give insight without declaring fact so you're allowed to bend the rules a little if it's in the spirit of the math.
My "gut" feeling agrees with the original post. If we treat the data as ordinal data, then we can only look at the accuracy, and 44% is, if anything, more compelling.
Cards on the table: I was involved in analyzing the data in the first place and have a vested interest in things-- but I am saying what I believe without any intentional bias.
But on your point, the Jury's still out on what to do with Likert-type data like this. Purists do say that it's ordinal and therefore you can't do any numeric analysis on it, but practically speaking you can learn a lot from it by treating it as interval data.
In my opinion, statistical analysis like this is ALWAYS two parts speculation and one part science (if you're lucky). It's designed to give insight without declaring fact so you're allowed to bend the rules a little if it's in the spirit of the math.
My "gut" feeling agrees with the original post. If we treat the data as ordinal data, then we can only look at the accuracy, and 44% is, if anything, more compelling.
Cards on the table: I was involved in analyzing the data in the first place and have a vested interest in things-- but I am saying what I believe without any intentional bias.