Category: NHST

The persistence of NHST: “Wilfully stupid”?

I recently gave a research talk to Psychology at La Trobe, my old University–although I now live an hour out of the city and rarely visit the campus. I decided to turn things around from my previous few talks: Instead

Posted in NHST, Replication, The New Statistics

p intervals: Replicate and p is likely to be *very* different!

The Significance Roulette videos (here and here) are based on the probability distribution of the p value, in various situations. There’s more to the second video than I mentioned in my recent post about it. The video pictures the distribution of replication

Posted in NHST, Replication

Significance Roulette 2

In my post of a couple of days ago I gave the link to Significance Roulette 1, a video that explains how to generate the roulette wheel for a ‘typical experiment’, by which I meant an independent groups experiment, N = 32

Posted in ITNS, NHST, Replication, The New Statistics

Significance Roulette 1

If you run an experiment, obtain p = .05, then repeat the experiment–exactly the same but with a new sample–what p value are you likely to get? The answer, surprisingly, is just about any value! In other words, the sampling

Posted in ITNS, NHST, Replication, The New Statistics

A conference about–wait for it–the p value! But other things too.

In March 2016 the American Statistical Association (ASA) posted online a policy statement about the p value. You can see it here. This was remarkable–for one thing because it was the first time the ASA had made a public pronouncement

Posted in NHST, Open Science, The New Statistics

Wise words from Ken Rothman, who is statistical reform royalty

I (Geoff) recently came across an article published in 2014 with the title Six Persistent Research Misconceptions. All six are important, but it’s no. 6 that would be most familiar to anyone reading ITNS: Misconception 6. Significance testing is useful

Posted in NHST, The New Statistics

p Hacking: More than you ever wish to know

I recently received an email telling me that an article I had reviewed for a journal had achieved 10,000 views. The astonishing thing was that the email arrived less than 3 weeks after the article had been published online! Believe

Posted in NHST, Open Science

The New Statistics seems OK to use with the Psychology Major Field Test

“If my department switches to the new statistics, will this tank our majors’ scores on the Major Field Test, which our administration uses as an important assessment tool?” This was one of the first questions asked during a workshop Craig

Posted in ITNS, NHST

NHST: The double whammy!

When I gave a talk at the HFESA conference, I started of course with an example of the damage done by NHST. My chosen article describes three examples in the field of road safety of how reliance on statistical significance

Posted in Applied research, NHST

“Corrupt research” – Quite a book title

I’ve just finished reading a great book: Hubbard, R. (2015). Corrupt research. Sage. I’ve just given it a five-star review on Amazon. In brief, Hubbard is highly–as in extremely highly–critical of the conventional ‘significant difference’ paradigm, centred on finding p

Posted in NHST, Open Science, The New Statistics