Thanks Chris .. this is a terrific article and many undergrads can plow through 
it. I have gone back and forth on the p versus CI (which is simply rearranging 
the math) versus effect size issue and have come to the conclusion that we have 
to keep our options open and not use one rule to evaluate research findings. In 
my stat class - after doing my lecture on how an IQ difference of 1 point can 
be significantly different when N = 5000 per group - I sometimes talk about the 
1988 (?) study of aspirin and Myocardial infarction in JAMA or NEJM (I am home 
away from my notes) which found a .8% reduction in MI from a sample of 11,000 
placebo controls (risk = 1.7%) and about 11,000 who took aspirin (risk = .9%). 
The chi square is p < .001 but the effect size is tiny, but even that 1% drop 
is important when the stakes are high and you are one of the roughly 100 who 
was spared a MI. that's when I introduce "relative risk" thinking: .9 versus 
1.7 means the chance of a MI is cut in half. That type of comparison is 
especially important when dealing with low base rate diseases. And thanks Jim 
for the divorce example ... 

JK 

========================== 
John W. Kulig, Ph.D. 
Professor of Psychology 
Coordinator, Psychology Honors 
Plymouth State University 
Plymouth NH 03264 
========================== 

----- Original Message -----

From: "Jim Clark" <[email protected]> 
To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" 
<[email protected]> 
Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2014 6:46:59 PM 
Subject: RE: [tips] Scientific method: Statistical errors : Nature News & 
Comment 

Hi 

Interesting article, although I need to think more about it. One obvious 
weakness is the old canard about effect size being a better indicator of 
importance than p value. The author uses the example of a divorce rate change 
being tiny: "meeting online nudged the divorce rate from 7.67% down to 5.96%." 
One source indicates that there are about 2,000,000 marriages in the USA per 
year. 7.67% is 153,400 divorces, 5.96% is 119,200 divorces, for a reduction of 
34,200 divorces or 22.3% fewer divorces every year. Not exactly what I would 
call a "tiny" difference. 

Take care 
Jim 

Jim Clark 
Professor & Chair of Psychology 
204-786-9757 
4L41A 


-----Original Message----- 
From: Christopher Green [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2014 4:43 PM 
To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) 
Subject: [tips] Scientific method: Statistical errors : Nature News & Comment 

An interesting article about the problems of p-values that might even be 
understandable to undergraduates. 
http://www.nature.com/news/scientific-method-statistical-errors-1.14700 

Chris 
....... 
Christopher D Green 
Department of Psychology 
York University 
Toronto, ON M6C 1G4 

[email protected] 
http://www.yorku.ca/christo 
--- 
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. 
To unsubscribe click here: 
http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13251.645f86b5cec4da0a56ffea7a891720c9&n=T&l=tips&o=34162
 
or send a blank email to 
leave-34162-13251.645f86b5cec4da0a56ffea7a89172...@fsulist.frostburg.edu 

--- 
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. 
To unsubscribe click here: 
http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13338.f659d005276678c0696b7f6beda66454&n=T&l=tips&o=34164
 
or send a blank email to 
leave-34164-13338.f659d005276678c0696b7f6beda66...@fsulist.frostburg.edu 


---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected].
To unsubscribe click here: 
http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=34165
or send a blank email to 
leave-34165-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu

Reply via email to