Firstly, a boxplot with the quotient of entertainment contributions to entertainment & internet contributions.
http://i.imgur.com/FWQWy.png
You can see quite easily that there's a difference which is also significant (95%, t = -4.73).
I've also done a logistic regression correcting with age, party (is_democrat), seniority and quota of contributions (quota_ent).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ support | Coef. Std. Err. z P>|z| [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- age | .0258551 .0358136 0.72 0.470 -.0443382 .0960485 is_democrat | -1.252883 .6243361 -2.01 0.045 -2.476559 -.0292067 seniority | -.0262688 .0381962 -0.69 0.492 -.101132 .0485943 quota_ent | 5.839435 1.447732 4.03 0.000 3.001933 8.676938 _cons | -1.968467 2.01512 -0.98 0.329 -5.918029 1.981096 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edit: @adamtaylor: Here's a scatter plot with each contribution, transformed with log(1 + x) for readability: http://i.imgur.com/MRciL.png
Firstly, a boxplot with the quotient of entertainment contributions to entertainment & internet contributions.
http://i.imgur.com/FWQWy.png
You can see quite easily that there's a difference which is also significant (95%, t = -4.73).
I've also done a logistic regression correcting with age, party (is_democrat), seniority and quota of contributions (quota_ent).
The AUC is 0.8089 which is quite okay. Furthermore, it would be interesting to test whether location is a significant factor.Edit: @adamtaylor: Here's a scatter plot with each contribution, transformed with log(1 + x) for readability: http://i.imgur.com/MRciL.png