Why We Don’t Really Know What "Statistical Significance" Means: A Major Educational Failure

作者: J. Scott Armstrong , Raymond Hubbard

DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.1154386

关键词:

摘要: The Neyman-Pearson theory of hypothesis testing, with the Type I error rate, α, as significance level, is widely regarded statistical testing orthodoxy. Fisher’s model where evidential p value denotes level significance, nevertheless dominates practice. This paradox has occurred because these two incompatible theories classical have been anonymously mixed together, creating false impression a single, coherent inference. We show that this hybrid approach to its misleading

参考文章(30)
Del I. Hawkins, Donald S. Tull, Marketing research : measurement & method Macmillan , Collier Macmillan. ,(1990)
Seymour Sudman, Edward Blair, Marketing Research: A Problem-Solving Approach ,(1998)
David J. Ortinau, Joseph F. Hair, Robert P. Bush, Marketing Research Within a Changing Information Environment ,(2003)
Thomas C. Kinnear, James R. Taylor, Marketing Research: An Applied Approach ,(1983)
William G. Zikmund, Exploring marketing research ,(1982)
Domenic V. Cicchetti, Role of null hypothesis significance testing (NHST) in the design of neuropsychologic research. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology. ,vol. 20, pp. 293- 295 ,(1998) , 10.1076/JCEN.20.2.293.1165
R.Murray Lindsay, Reconsidering the status of tests of significance: An alternative criterion of adequacy Accounting, Organizations and Society. ,vol. 20, pp. 35- 53 ,(1995) , 10.1016/0361-3682(93)E0004-Z