✳flâneur — a map of the web's best reading
What a nerdy debate about p-values shows about science — and how to fix it - Vox
vox.com · 3,447 words · saved by 1 readers
The case for, and against, redefining "statistical significance."
Science What a nerdy debate about p-values shows about science — and how to fix it The case for, and against, redefining “statistical significance.” by Brian Resnick Jul 31, 2017, 4:00 PM UTC Andy Baker / Getty Creative Images Brian Resnick was Vox’s science and health editor and is the co-creator of Unexplainable, Vox’s podcast about unanswered questions in science. There's a huge debate going on in social science right now. The question is simple, and strikes near the heart of all research: What counts as solid evidence? The answer matters because many disciplines are currently in the midst
Explore this link on the map →related reading
- An Actually Correct Explanation of P-Valuesoutsidetheasylum.blog
- Against NHST — LessWronglesswrong.com
- There are no statistics in the Kingdom of Godexperimental-history.com
- p < 0.05 considered harmful - by Richard Demsyn-Jonessimplicityissota.substack.com
- The rise and fall of peer review - by Adam Mastroianniexperimentalhistory.substack.com
- Cargo Cult Sciencecalteches.library.caltech.edu
- How Should We Critique Research? · Gwern.netgwern.net
- P-Value Method for Hypothesis Testing | Towards Data Sciencetowardsdatascience.com
- How Should We Critique Research? · Gwern.netgwern.net
- 看電影學統計:p值的陷阱 (3) – 「摘櫻桃」問題 – 菜市場政治學whogovernstw.org
- Multiple Hypothesis Testing | Stitch Fix Technology – Multithreadedmultithreaded.stitchfix.com
- Statistical Significance vs. Practical Significance of Research Resultspages.uoregon.edu