The significance test controversy
British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 23 (2):170-181 (1972)
| Abstract | This article has no associated abstract. (fix it) | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,865 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesTzachi Zamir (2004). The Sense of Smell: Morality and Rhetoric in the Bramhall-Hobbes Controversy. Sophia 43 (2):49-61.
Joseph S. Rossi (1998). Meta-Analysis, Power Analysis, and the Null-Hypothesis Significance-Test Procedure. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (2):216-217.
J. V. Howard (2009). Significance Testing with No Alternative Hypothesis: A Measure of Surprise. Erkenntnis 70 (2):253 - 270.
Deborah G. Mayo (1991). Novel Evidence and Severe Tests. Philosophy of Science 58 (4):523-552.
Gregory Cooper (1993). The Competition Controversy in Community Ecology. Biology and Philosophy 8 (4):359-384.
Charles F. Blaich (1998). The Null-Hypothesis Significance-Test Procedure: Can't Live with It, Can't Live Without It. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (2):194-195.
John F. Kihlstrom (1998). If You've Got an Effect, Test its Significance; If You've Got a Weak Effect, Do a Meta-Analysis. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (2):205-206.
R. D. Rosenkrantz (1973). The Significance Test Controversy. Synthese 26 (2):304 - 321.
Ronald N. Giere (1972). Review: The Significance Test Controversy. [REVIEW] British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 23 (2):170 - 181.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads11 ( #100,810 of 556,803 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,847 of 556,803 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
