Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-gtxcr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T16:16:34.744Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Null-hypothesis tests are not completely stupid, but Bayesian statistics are better

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 1998

David Rindskopf
Affiliation:
Educational Psychology, City University of New York Graduate Center, New York, NY 10036 drindsko@email.gc.cuny.edu

Abstract

Unfortunately, reading Chow's work is likely to leave the reader more confused than enlightened. My preferred solutions to the “controversy” about null- hypothesis testing are: (1) recognize that we really want to test the hypothesis that an effect is “small,” not null, and (2) use Bayesian methods, which are much more in keeping with the way humans naturally think than are classical statistical methods.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Copyright
© 1998 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)