Jerry Dallal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in sci.stat.edu: >"Robert J. MacG. Dawson" wrote: > >> > > But I don't see why either the advertiser or the consumer advocate >> > would, or should, do a two-tailed test. >> >> The idea is that the "product" of these tests is a p-value to be used >> in support of an argument. The evidence for the proposal is not made any >> stronger by the tester's wish for a certain outcome; so the tester >> should not artificially halve the reported p-value. >> >> Superficially, the idea of halving your p-values, doubling your chance >> of reporting a "statistically significant" result in your favored >> direction if there is really nothing there, and as a bonus, doing a >> David-and-Uriah job ("And he wrote in the letter, saying, Set ye Uriah >> in the forefront of the hottest battle, and retire ye from him, that he >> may be smitten, and die.") on any possible finding in the other >> direction, may seem attractive. A moment's thought should persuade us >> that it is not ethical. >> >> -Robert Dawson > >I'm not sure I understand the argument,
Oh good -- I thought it was just me! -- Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA http://oakroadsystems.com My reply address is correct as is. The courtesy of providing a correct reply address is more important to me than time spent deleting spam. ================================================================= Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES are available at http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/ =================================================================