The Difference Between Significant and Not Significant is Not Statistically Significant
Filed in Articles ,Encyclopedia ,R
Subscribe to Decision Science News by Email (one email per week, easy unsubscribe)
Subscribe to Decision Science News by Email (one email per week, easy unsubscribe)
MINDLESS SIGNIFICANCE TESTING
Some well-made points grow old while no one pays attention to them. One of the most embarrassing for social science is its categorical perception of p-values.
Tender of kindred Web site Andrew Gelman and Hal Stern have an article whose name says it all: The Difference Between “Significant” and “Not Significant” is not Itself Statistically Significant.
OTHER RECOMMENDED READING
- Here’s a nice Science News article by Bruce Bower on the issue.
- Cohen, J. (1994). The earth is round (p < .05). American Psychologist, 49, 997-1003.
- Gigerenzer, G. (1993). The superego, the ego, and the id in statistical reasoning. In G. Keren & C. Lewis (Eds.), A handbook for data analysis in the behavioral sciences: Methodological issues (pp. 311-339). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
- Gigerenzer, G. (2004). Mindless statistics. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 33, 587–606.
- Krantz, D. H. (1999), The null hypothesis testing controversy in psychology, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 94, 1372-1381.
- Rozeboom, W. W. (1960).The fallacy of the null hypothesis significance test. Psychological Bulletin, 57, 416-428.
Image credit: I made it in R
