TIPSters: It's an old idea, but perhaps worth mentioning in response to this thread about teaching some statistics in intro. I use the analogy of a criminal court proceeding for which the evidence is circumstantial rather than physical. The null hypothesis is that the defendant is not guilty, which the jury will retain if the defendant's connection to the crime is judged to be an unfortunate consequence of chance (. . . wrong place at the wrong time, etc.) or rejected as a guilty verdict if chance is an unacceptably remote explanation for the accumulated facts in the case.
Use of the courtroom analogy allows me 1. to introduce the concepts of Type 1 error (innocent defendant sent to prison) and Type 2 error (guilty defendant goes free) in a way the students can easily relate to; and 2. makes the point that inferences from "significant" statistics are not guaranteed to lead to correct inferences. Kenneth M. Rosenberg Professor Department of Psychology Oswego State University of NY --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
