Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-02T22:11:30.379Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The non-significance of straw man arguments

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 1998

Niels G. Waller  and
Wesley O. Johnson
Niels G. Waller
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of California, Davis [email protected] psychology.ucdavis.edu/waller
Wesley O. Johnson
Affiliation:
Division of Statistics, University of California, Davis, Davis CA, 95616
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We demonstrate that Statistical significance (Chow 1996) includes straw man arguments against (1) effect size, (2) meta-analysis, and (3) Bayesianism. We agree with the author that in experimental designs, H0 “is the effect of chance influences on the data-collection procedure . . . it says nothing about the substantive hypothesis or its logical complement” (Chow 1996, p. 41).

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 21 , Issue 2 , April 1998 , pp. 226 - 227
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.)