David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Despite publication of many well-argued critiques of null hypothesis testing (NHT), behavioral science researchers continue to rely heavily on this set of practices. Although we agree with most critics' catalogs of NHT's flaws, this article also takes the unusual stance of identifying virtues that may explain why NHT continues to be so extensively used. These virtues include providing results in the form of a dichotomous (yes/no) hypothesis evaluation and providing an index (p value) that has a justifiable mapping onto confidence in repeatability of a null hypothesis rejection. The most-criticized flaws of NHT can be avoided when the importance of a hypothesis, rather than the p value of its test, is used to determine that a finding is worthy of report, and when p = /05 is treated as insufficient basis for confidence in the replicability of an isolated non-null finding. Together with many recent critics of NHT, we also urge reporting of important hypothesis tests in enough descriptive detail to permit secondary uses such as meta-analysis.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Robert W. Frick (1998). Chow's Defense of Null-Hypothesis Testing: Too Traditional? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (2):199-199.
Jan Sprenger (2013). Testing a Precise Null Hypothesis: The Case of Lindley’s Paradox. Philosophy of Science 80 (5):733-744.
David Rindskopf (1998). Null-Hypothesis Tests Are Not Completely Stupid, but Bayesian Statistics Are Better. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (2):215-216.
Edward Erwin (1998). The Logic of Null Hypothesis Testing. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (2):197-198.
Joseph S. Rossi (1998). Meta-Analysis, Power Analysis, and the Null-Hypothesis Significance-Test Procedure. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (2):216-217.
Stephan Lewandowsky & Murray Maybery (1998). The Critics Rebutted: A Pyrrhic Victory. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (2):210-211.
George A. Morgan, Problems With Null Hypothesis Significance Testing (NHST): What Do the Textbooks Say?
Bruno D. Zumbo (1998). A Viable Alternative to Null-Hypothesis Testing. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (2):227-228.
Jonathan J. Koehler (1997). A Farewell to Normative Null Hypothesis Testing in Base Rate Research. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 20 (4):780-782.
Jay Odenbaugh (2010). Philosophy of the Environmental Sciences. In P. D. Magnus & Jacob Busch (eds.), New Waves in Philosophy of Science. Palgrave Macmillan
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.
Wendy S. Parker (2011). When Climate Models Agree: The Significance of Robust Model Predictions. Philosophy of Science 78 (4):579-600.
Adam S. Goodie (2004). Null Hypothesis Statistical Testing and the Balance Between Positive and Negative Approaches. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (3):338-339.
Henderikus J. Stam & Grant A. Pasay (1998). The Historical Case Against Null-Hypothesis Significance Testing. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (2):219-220.
Added to index2010-12-22
Total downloads11 ( #290,979 of 1,789,925 )
Recent downloads (6 months)6 ( #139,882 of 1,789,925 )
How can I increase my downloads?