M. Sylvester asked:
what is the rationale for the .05 and .01 level of signifance as acceptable? who came up with this Eurocentric concept anyway? And how about single-case studies? Read this paper and find out about Pearson, Galton Cramer and company: Cowles, M., & Davis, C. (1982). On the origins of the .05 level of significance. American Psychologist, 37, 553-558. And here are three questions for you, Michael: Given that the ideas were mainly developed in Europe, does this makes them "Eurocentric"? Does "Eurocentric" have a negative overtone for you? If so, why would that be so in this case? Stuart McKelvie ___________________________________________________________________ Stuart J. McKelvie, Ph.D., Phone: (819)822-9600, Extension 2402 Department of Psychology, Fax: (819)822-9661 Bishop's University, 2600 College Street, Sherbrooke, Québec J1M 1Z7, Canada. E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bishop's University Psychology Department Web Page: http://www.ubishops.ca/ccc/div/soc/psy <blocked::http://www.ubishops.ca/ccc/div/soc/psy> ___________________________________________________________ ________________________________ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: April 25, 2008 12:14 AM To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) Subject: [tips] .05 and .01 what is the rationale for the .05 and .01 level of signifance as acceptable? who came up with this Eurocentric concept anyway? And how about single-case studies? Michael Sylvester,PhD Daytona Beach,Florida --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
