On Thu, 8 Feb 2001, jim clark wrote in part:
We all agree that it is confusing, but I do believe that the use
of one-tailed and two-tailed to refer to directional vs.
non-directional hypotheses (rather than uniquely to one or two
tails of a distribution) is very wide-spread and quite common.
On Tue, 6 Feb 2001, jim clark wrote in part:
The problem is that one-tailed test is taken as synonymous with
directional hypothesis (e.g., Ha: Mu1Mu2). This causes no
confusion with distributions such as the t-test, because
directional implies one-tailed. This correspondence does not
hold
Incorrectly? Would you please expand your thought.
The only thing that might be called an error in
his laws, that comes immediately to mind, is the
fact that he didn't allow for the small problem of
two genes being on the same chromosome -- but then
he didn't know about chromosomes. Is this what
Bob Wheeler wrote:
Your point is a good one, but as a side issue, let
me object to the word "fudged." It implies
chicanery, which is not something that even Fisher
cared to imply. No one will ever know why Mendel's
results appear as they do, but It was not
necessarily with an intent to
Hi
On Tue, 6 Feb 2001, Thom Baguley wrote:
Donald Burrill wrote:
Well, it _might_ be. Depends on what hypothesis was being tested,
doesn't it? And so far "rjkim" hasn't deigned to tell us that.
Yes, though I think the vocabulary can obscure what goes on. To me a
"one-tailed" test
would this be like the F being less than 1 ... in a regular anova??? mean
difference not even varying like we would expect them to by chance if null
were true?
=
Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks
I think some of this is a matter of vocabulary. Do you say 'one tailed
test' or 'one sided test'? (Ditto for 'two'.) People seem to use the two
phrases fairly interchangeably. In this context, it does not matter
whether you think of the F distribution as having two 'ends' - and you
can use one or
Your point is well taken, and I didn't mean to imply dishonesty either --
the term "fudged" was a poor choice, but I meant it in the sense of
manipulation or filtering, not necessarily conscious, and I mentioned that
it was an assertion.
Rich Strauss
At 06:13 PM 2/5/01 -0500, you wrote:
Your
