At 07:12 PM 4/10/00 -0700, David A. Heiser wrote:
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Michael Granaas <<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Our current verbal lables leave much to be desired.
> >
> > Depending on who you ask the "null hypothesis" is
> >
> > a) a hypothesis of no effect (nil hypothesis)
> > b) an a priori false hypothesis to be rejected (straw dog hypothesis)
> > c) an a priori plausible hypothesis to be tested and falsified or
> > corroborated (wish I had a term for this usage/real null?)
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --------
> The concept of a hypothesis is important. It can be used to teach an
> important statistical concept.
>
i think that the notion of a RESEARCH hypothesis is helpful ... but, most nulls
are not
if we spent more time on trying to define a sensible research hypothesis ...
and then translate THAT into some working hunch worthy of testing ... rather
than defining nulls that in many cases are rather silly ... i would be happier
==============================================================
dennis roberts, penn state university
educational psychology, 8148632401
http://roberts.ed.psu.edu/users/droberts/droberts.htm
===========================================================================
This list is open to everyone. Occasionally, less thoughtful
people send inappropriate messages. Please DO NOT COMPLAIN TO
THE POSTMASTER about these messages because the postmaster has no
way of controlling them, and excessive complaints will result in
termination of the list.
For information about this list, including information about the
problem of inappropriate messages and information about how to
unsubscribe, please see the web page at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
===========================================================================
