Читать книгу Applied Univariate, Bivariate, and Multivariate Statistics - Daniel J. Denis - Страница 72

2.28 WHAT MAKES A p‐VALUE SMALL? A CRITICAL OVERVIEW AND PRACTICAL DEMONSTRATION OF NULL HYPOTHESIS SIGNIFICANCE TESTING

Оглавление

The workhorse for establishing statistical evidence in the social and natural sciences is the method of null hypothesis significance testing (or, “NHST” for short). However, since its inception with R.A. Fisher in the early 1900s, the significance test has been the topic of much debate, both statistical and philosophical. Throughout much of this book, NHST is regularly used to evaluate null hypotheses in methods such as the analysis of variance, regression, and various multivariate procedures. Indeed, the procedure is universally used in most statistical methods.

It behooves us then, before embarking on all of these methodologies, to discuss the nature of the null hypothesis significance test, and clearly demonstrate what it actually means, not only in a statistical context but also in how it should be interpreted in a research or substantive context.

The purpose of this final section of the present chapter is to provide a clear and concise demonstration and summary of the factors that influence the size of a computed p‐value in virtually every statistical significance test. Understanding why statements such as “p < 0.05” can be reflective of even the smallest and trivial of effects is critical for the practitioner or researcher to appreciate if he or she is to assess and appraise statistical evidence in an intelligent and thoughtful manner. It is not an exaggeration to say that if one does not understand the make‐up of a p‐value and the factors that directly influence its size, one cannot properly evaluate statistical evidence, nor should one even make the attempt to do so. Though these arguments are not new and have been put forth by even the very best of methodologists (e.g., see Cohen, 1990; Meehl, 1978) there is evidence to suggest that many practitioners and researchers do not understand the factors that determine the size of a p‐value (Gigerenzer, 2004). To emphasize once again—understanding the determinants of a p‐value and what makes p‐values distinct from effect sizes is not simply “fashionable.” Rather, it is absolutely mandatory for any attempt to properly evaluate statistical evidence in a research report. Does the paper you're reading provide evidence of a successful treatment for cancer? If you do not understand the distinctions between p‐values and effect sizes, you will be unable to properly assess the evidence. It is that important. As we will see, stating a result as “statistically significant” does not in itself tell you whether the treatment works or does not work, and in some cases, tells you very little at all from a scientific vantage point.

Applied Univariate, Bivariate, and Multivariate Statistics

Подняться наверх