On 10/24/2012 5:31 AM, Stephen P. King wrote:
Woo-woo. Small effect sizes which are *statistically* significant are indicative of bias
errors. I'd wager a proper Bayesian analysis of the original data will show they
*support* the null hypothesis (c.f. "Testing Precise Hypotheses" Berger & Delampady, Stat
Sci 1987 v2 no. 3 317-352 and "Odds Are It's Wrong" Tom Siegfried, Science News 27 Mar
2010). Meta-analyses are notoriously unreliable and should only be considered suggestive
at a best.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at