Perhaps I missed it in this discussion, but I haven't seen any reference to
differences in how easily hypotheses can be formulated in different cases.
In studying a series of similar systems, such as a series of glacial lakes,
it is easy to formulate hypotheses based on the idea that there are
I've been meaning to comment here too.
When I teach statistics, my goal is to give the graduate students a
toolbox if you will, of useful ways to test ideas. More complex
statistics comes later. In teaching, I use the idea of testing hypotheses,
with a very important caveat. Both, null and
Well-put! It would be great if people (particularly reviewers) always kept
this in mind.
--Ruchira
On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 7:57 AM, James J. Roper jjro...@gmail.com wrote:
I've been meaning to comment here too.
When I teach statistics, my goal is to give the graduate students a
toolbox if
Dear list members,
My comments on (scientific) hypothesis testing have been based on the
following definition of hypothesis:
A hypothesis is a proposed explanation for an observable phenomenon.
Clearly, any published article that mention the word hypothesis not
necessarily was testing a
Hi Kevin, this is great. Here's a link to a PDF of the article I wrote in
the British Ecological Society journal
http://post.queensu.ca/~groganp/Hypotheses%20in%20Ecology2foradobe.pdf.
Figure 1 in particular may help in making more clear what I mean by
iterative, and how one cycle feeds into
...@gmail.com
To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU
Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 3:32 PM
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Hypothesis Testing in Ecology: Precision is what
makes it valuable
Paul Grogan has stated very elegantly the case for a well formulated
hypothesis, but I wish point out another aspect of the matter
If we iteratively modify our hypotheses through the process of data
collection, data analysis, or manuscript preparation, how different is
this process from observational or exploratory research? It is,
of course, different to some debatable extent. Regardless, I think
Paul's comments
I contend that the majority of researches are NOT based on hypothesis testing.
Every natural resource management agencies (Federal, state, and municipality)
spends majority of their budget for data collection and monitoring to ensure
that the focused natural resources are properly
.
WT
- Original Message - From: Swain, Pat (FWE)
pat.sw...@state.ma.us
To:ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU
Sent: Monday, March 07, 2011 6:03 AM
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Hypothesis Testing in Ecology
Ecolog-L,
Way back when the question about hypothesis testing in ecology was first
posed
- From: Swain, Pat (FWE)
pat.sw...@state.ma.us
To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU
Sent: Monday, March 07, 2011 6:03 AM
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Hypothesis Testing in Ecology
Ecolog-L,
Way back when the question about hypothesis testing in ecology was
first
posed to the group, one
Sent: Monday, March 07, 2011 6:03 AM
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Hypothesis Testing in Ecology
Ecolog-L,
Way back when the question about hypothesis testing in ecology was first
posed to the group, one of the questions was whether anyone had rejected
projects or grant proposals
: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Hypothesis Testing in Ecology
It seems a rather critical issue has raised its head at this juncture in
the discussion. Is all data gathering research. I think we risk being
disingenuous and misleading the many students on this listserve if we
don't clearly and unequivocally answer
Hi,
I am fascinated by the varying use of hypotheses in ecology, and have been
following the recent emails with great interest. All scientific research
must presumably share a common goal to reach the highest attainable levels
of precision in explicitly articulating the research focus, and the
Paul Grogan has stated very elegantly the case for a well formulated
hypothesis, but I wish point out another aspect of the matter. People who
are prospecting for iron will pass right over gold without seeing it. This
is more than just a metaphor; it reflects how the human mind seems to work.
: Tuesday, March 08, 2011 2:34 PM
To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Hypothesis Testing in Ecology
It seems a rather critical issue has raised its head at this juncture in
the discussion. Is all data gathering research. I think we risk being
disingenuous and misleading the many
...@state.ma.us
To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU
Sent: Monday, March 07, 2011 6:03 AM
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Hypothesis Testing in Ecology
Ecolog-L,
Way back when the question about hypothesis testing in ecology was first
posed to the group, one of the questions was whether anyone had rejected
one approaches gaining knowledge of a
site without a (statistically) valid inventory.
WT
- Original Message - From: Swain, Pat (FWE)
pat.sw...@state.ma.us
To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU
Sent: Monday, March 07, 2011 6:03 AM
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Hypothesis Testing in Ecology
Community Ecologist
From: Manuel Spínola [mailto:mspinol...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, March 07, 2011 12:02 PM
To: Swain, Pat (FWE)
Cc: ECOLOG-L@listserv.umd.edu
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Hypothesis Testing in Ecology
Dear Pat,
But what do you consider a scientific hypothesis? Because the statement
- Original Message - From: Swain, Pat (FWE)
pat.sw...@state.ma.us
To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU
Sent: Monday, March 07, 2011 6:03 AM
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Hypothesis Testing in Ecology
Ecolog-L,
Way back when the question about hypothesis testing in ecology was first
posed
: Martin Meiss mme...@gmail.com
To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU
Sent: terça-feira, 8 de Março de 2011 13:49
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Hypothesis Testing in Ecology
I am amazed by Pat Swain's statements implying that unless a program of
work
includes formal hypothesis testing, it's not even research
- Original Message - From: Swain, Pat (FWE)
pat.sw...@state.ma.us
To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU
Sent: Monday, March 07, 2011 6:03 AM
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Hypothesis Testing in Ecology
Ecolog-L,
Way back when the question about hypothesis testing in ecology was
first
sampling it, and how one approaches gaining knowledge of a
site without a (statistically) valid inventory.
WT
- Original Message - From: Swain, Pat (FWE)
pat.sw...@state.ma.us
To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU
Sent: Monday, March 07, 2011 6:03 AM
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L
randomly sampling it, and how one approaches gaining knowledge of a
site without a (statistically) valid inventory.
WT
- Original Message - From: Swain, Pat (FWE)
pat.sw...@state.ma.us
To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU
Sent: Monday, March 07, 2011 6:03 AM
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Hypothesis Testing
Having reviewed dozens of research proposals for NSF, USGS, Delta Bay
Authority, and Faculty Grant Programs at Universities I have rejected
research w/o hypotheses stated when the program required hypotheses be
stated. In two cases, the proposals set up LTREM sites in which data
collection and
-
From: Resetarits, William william.resetar...@ttu.edu
To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU
Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2011 12:34 PM
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Hypothesis Testing in Ecology
It seems a rather critical issue has raised its head at this juncture in the
discussion. Is all data gathering
Ecolog-L,
Way back when the question about hypothesis testing in ecology was first posed
to the group, one of the questions was whether anyone had rejected projects or
grant proposals for lack of hypotheses. The discussion has gone on while I
thought about posting a response to that, but with
Dear Pat,
But what do you consider a scientific hypothesis? Because the statement of
an hypothesis could be easy, the difficult task is the logic of the study to
test the hypothesis, something that you have to do with the predictions
because you cannot test an hypothesis itself, but throught its
If a funding agency wants hypothesis driven research, then you give them
hypothesis driven research!
This varies form state to state, agency to agency. Getting exploratory
research funded is not easy, its much easier to get funding for confirmatory
research.
Malcolm
On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 8:03
] On Behalf Of David L. McNeely
Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2011 10:57 AM
To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Question Ecology Natural History etc Re:
[ECOLOG-L] Hypothesis Testing in Ecology
Marcus, with due respect, and I do respect your opinion and
contributions: You
: grants, jobs, news
[mailto:ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU] On Behalf Of David L. McNeely
Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2011 10:57 AM
To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Question Ecology Natural History etc Re: [ECOLOG-L]
Hypothesis Testing in Ecology
Marcus, with due respect, and I do
Jeff's comments are good ones. I don't know why all the apostrophes
came through as question marks, but maybe that's appropriate -- these
are difficult issues and I, for one, have more questions than answers.
On one hand, there are certainly examples that demonstrate that
understanding is neither
One more thing: what predictions can you make if you understand what
caused the extinction of the (non-avian) dinosaurs?
Jane
On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 7:19 AM, Jeff Houlahan jeffh...@unb.ca wrote:
In response to Jane?s comments ? I admit that understanding and prediction
are not the same thing
Hi Jane, great question about how to get students to demonstrate
understanding. One I hadn't thought about. Off the top of my head I
would say that they would demonstrate understanding if they knew what
predictions a certain concept would make, which of those predictions
had been tested,
Dear list members,
As someone who has
-been teaching model based stats to natural scientists for decades
-has mastered the logic and arcana of Neyman-Pearson
Decision Theoretic Hypothesis Testing (p-values)
-routinely uses model based statistics and parameter estimation
with conf intervals
Within this thread I was reminded of another situation related to publishing
individual observations and the increasing use/creation of shared databases.
Why are there so many requests to create shared databases? Because people
have delegated individual observations and observations with small
On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 5:41 AM, Manuel Spínola mspinol...@gmail.com wrote:
I think there is a confusion about hypothesis testing that Jane was
referring to in the original post. We are moving away from her questions.
Well, I was asking about both types of hypothesis testing. They're
different
Hi Matt,
Since this conversation has gotten off to a solid start (but where's
Wirt Atmar? I expected to hear more from our resident ex-physicist), I
can now reveal more of my thoughts. Specifically, you've come near a
very important point. Even natural history requires what may be called
Hi Jeff,
Prediction and understanding are actually very different things and
being good at one doesn't necessarily imply being good at the other.
An example from the book _Foresight and Understanding_ by Stephen
Toulmin: the Babylonians had no concept of the heliocentric solar
system but they
Rudhira, I would definitely include the studies you describe as natural
history and as ecology. I was somewhat tongue in cheek, and a little bit
serious in my earlier post. To me, bottom line, ecology is an attempt to
understand the nature (or history) of nature. In recent years we have
Dear list members,
For those interested on statistical hypothesis testing, null hypothesis
significant testing and p-values I would like to suggest the following
web site with many quotes from many well known statisticians.
http://warnercnr.colostate.edu/~anderson/nester.html
and for new
Dear Malcom,
I am not aware of that procedure. Can you explain a little bit more how
this work? I would like to hear more on that because I teach statistics
and I could consider teaching that procedure in my courses.
What do you mean with complex regression analysis and a suite of
Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2011 3:21 PM
To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Question Ecology Natural History etc Re: [ECOLOG-L]
Hypothesis Testing in Ecology
Thanks, David. Now I don't have to toss all my Darwin stuff into the dustbin.
WT
PS: David or others: Can you suggest any
I think there might be a useful distinction between natural history and
ecology, namely, the degree to which observations are replicated. With the
phrase natural history there is no connotation or expectation that
observations can be strictly replicated (this does not mean patterns cannot
be
Ecology Natural History etc Re: [ECOLOG-L]
Hypothesis Testing in Ecology
Wayne Tyson landr...@cox.net wrote:
Ecolog:
What specifically distinguishes natural history from ecology?
Wayne, Ernst Haeckel coined the term which became our modern term
ecology. You probably knew
I think the common interpretation of natural history among ecologists
could be called descriptive ecology. It has the tacit hypotheses Matt
Chew listed, but I don't think people associate natural history with
explicit hypothesis-testing. It's about collecting and describing
observations that
Maybe this was true in the 19th century, and there are still some
minor outlets where
observational notes with limited or no replication is accepted so you
can publish the
kind of observations you suggest, but modern and mainstream natural history
studies require huge sample sizes and extensive
There is a paper by Halliday and Jaeger published in Herpetologica
some years ago that is central to this discussion. It discusses the
differences between explorative and confirmative research. Most
scientists spend their time doing confirmative research, which is
hypothesis testing. However,
Ecolog:
What specifically distinguishes natural history from ecology?
WT
- Original Message -
From: Matt Chew anek...@gmail.com
To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU
Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2011 8:50 AM
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Hypothesis Testing in Ecology
Ecology without hypotheses has
that could do this might be
applicable anywhere.
- Original Message -
From: mcnee...@cox.net
To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU; Wayne Tyson landr...@cox.net
Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2011 10:27 AM
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Question Ecology Natural History etc Re: [ECOLOG-L]
Hypothesis Testing
@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU
Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2011 8:50 AM
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Hypothesis Testing in Ecology
Ecology without hypotheses has been dismissed (sometimes derided) as
natural
history, but even natural history requires one hypothesis. Reporting an
observation requires 0 confidence
To calculate p-values properly requires paying a lot of attention to how you
choose the null hypothesis and whether it is really appropriate for your
problem and the state of the art. I do not have a lot of experience in
ecology, but in bioinformatics people often choose null hypotheses because
, February 28, 2011 8:49 PM
To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Hypothesis Testing in Ecology
Hi Martin,
If you state a scientific hypothesis you need to derive predictions from
it, and sometimes you can state the predictions as statistical
hypotheses, but not always, in fact, Karl
From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news
[ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU] On Behalf Of Manuel Spínola [mspinol...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 6:49 PM
To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Hypothesis Testing in Ecology
Hi Martin,
If you
I think that while learning to study science, the hypothesis testing
format provides a framework in which a student can easily think more
deeply about the topic at hand and avoid presumptions of what will
happen. I agree with your assessmen tof AIC and of ecology in
general. We are all just
Ecology without hypotheses has been dismissed (sometimes derided) as natural
history, but even natural history requires one hypothesis. Reporting an
observation requires 0 confidence that an observation is meaningful, can be
communicated, and can be interpreted. There are also tacit hypotheses
Hi Chris and all, I actually think that it's a mistake to diminish the
role of p-values. My opinion on this (stongly influenced by the
writings of Rob Peters) is that there is only one way to demonstrate
understanding and that is through prediction. And predictions only
demonstrate
I wonder if you mean Alpha values?
p-values are what they are and only tell you how likely the
relationship expressed in your statistical test is to be repeated.
The alpha value is an apriori set value used in decision theory. If
you set alpha to 0.05, then you state that if the p /= 0.05bla
Dear Jane,
That is a topic that have interested me for a long time. I teach
something of this in my classes to master students in wildlife
management and conservation here in Costa Rica. I know this is a
controversial issue.
First I recommend these 3 books:
Scientific Method for
Manuel Spínola mspinol...@gmail.com wrote:
There is no a superior approach to obtain scientific knowledge.
My dissertation advisor said on more than one occasion that, The scientific
method is doing whatever is necessary to get good answers to questions worth
asking. I don't think
My experience:
During my dissertation proposal defense, I was surprised by this debate
coming up.
I had listed my hypotheses within a powerpoint presentation as more or less
statistical hypotheses rather than explanatory ecological hypotheses. As a
'green' PhD student, I was somewhat aware of the
.
- Original Message -
From: David L. McNeely mcnee...@cox.net
To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU
Sent: segunda-feira, 28 de Fevereiro de 2011 16:39
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Hypothesis Testing in Ecology
My dissertation advisor said on more than one occasion that, The
scientific method is doing whatever
This may seem like blatant self-promotion, but I think that the best synthesis
of the interplay between natural history, experimentation, and theory is Earl
Werner's chapter in our Experimental Ecology book from 1998 (Werner, E.E.
1998. Ecological experiments and a research program in
I like Manuel's response.
To answer Jane's other questions:
1. Does it help you do better science?
It can, but not necessarily. See below.
Is it crowding out other approaches?
I'd like to hear more about this - what other systematic approaches are
there? For example, anecdotal observations are
I'm not sure I understand Manuel's distinction between statistical
hypootheses and scientific hypothesis. Is not the former supposed in some
way to mathematically embody/parameterize the latter?
But in any case, it seems to me that it is often hard to rigorously
formulate a null
Dear Manuel,
Thanks for your reply! I'll have to look up the books you recommended.
On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 7:49 AM, Manuel Spínola mspinol...@gmail.com wrote:
Is necessary to distinguish between statistical and scientific hypothesis.
Statistical hypotheses is about patterns, scientific
Dear Jane,
That is true (and very interesting), Popper didn't believe in inductive
reasoning as part of the scientific process, however, when you apply the
H-D method you can only corroborate the hypothesis, you cannot confirm
or prove logically an hypothesis, but you can logically reject the
Hi Martin,
If you state a scientific hypothesis you need to derive predictions from
it, and sometimes you can state the predictions as statistical
hypotheses, but not always, in fact, Karl Popper was not thinking on
statistics or statistical hypotheses.
As Malcolm McCallum said if you use
67 matches
Mail list logo
