Quad wrote: > > Statistical significance is a zero/one decision. Either it is > significant or it is not. You can't tell anything more. >
Well, I understand your point, but I respectfully disagree. Without digging two deeply into experimental design, in my own field we tend to look at statistical tests of hypotheses and consider things like parameter estimates from something like an OLS regression equation or ANOVA, etc. and we want to know the p-value associated with the parameter estimate rather than only whether the estimate is either significant or not based on the pre-planned significance level cutoff. Say the p-value is 0.01. This is significant under most (all?) interpretations. Likewise, p-value of 0.05 or lower is typically considered significant. But let's say a parameter estimate is significant at a p-value of 0.07 or 0.11. This is certainly not the same as an estimate with a p-value of 0.65. Bottom line, is that we are equally interested in the t-stat or F-stat and related p-values as we are in the labeling of a result as significant or not. Obviously, standard practices of reporting research results differ greatly across fields. And of course there are many other approaches to analyzing data from experiments other than traditional statistics approaches. Note: I haven't read the links noted, so my comments are generic, not related to these specific tests. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ garym's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=17325 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=97530 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
