The critics rebutted: A pyrrhic victory

Author(s): Maybery, M.

Journal/Book: Behav Brain Sci. 1998; 21: 40 West 20TH Street, New York, NY 10011-4211. Cambridge Univ Press. 210.

Abstract: We take up two issues discussed by Chow: the claim by critics of hypothesis that the null hypothesis (H-o) is always false, and the claim that reporting effect sizes is more appropriate than relying on statistical significance. Concerning the former, we agree with Chow's sentiment despite noting serious shortcomings in his discussion. Concerning the latter, we agree with Chow that effect size need not translate into scientific relevance, and furthermore reiterate that with small samples effect size measures cannot substitute for significance.

Note: Editorial Lewandowsky S, Univ Western Australia, Dept Psychol, Nedlands, Wa 6907, AUSTRALIA

Keyword(s): CONCEPTUAL RIGOR

Zurück | Weiter