David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (2):227-228 (1998)
This commentary advocates an alternative to null-hypothesis testing that was originally represented by Rozeboom over three decades ago yet is not considered by Chow (1996). The central distinguishing feature of this approach is that it allows the scientist to conclude that the data are much better fit by those hypotheses whose values fall inside the interval than by those outside.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Adam S. Goodie (2004). Null Hypothesis Statistical Testing and the Balance Between Positive and Negative Approaches. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (3):338-339.
Jonathan J. Koehler (1997). A Farewell to Normative Null Hypothesis Testing in Base Rate Research. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 20 (4):780-782.
Günther Palm (1998). Significance Testing – Does It Need This Defence? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (2):214-215.
Jay Odenbaugh (2010). Philosophy of the Environmental Sciences. In P. D. Magnus & Jacob Busch (eds.), New Waves in Philosophy of Science. Palgrave Macmillan.
Henderikus J. Stam & Grant A. Pasay (1998). The Historical Case Against Null-Hypothesis Significance Testing. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (2):219-220.
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.
Robert W. Frick (1998). Chow's Defense of Null-Hypothesis Testing: Too Traditional? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (2):199-199.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads5 ( #175,815 of 1,004,651 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,617 of 1,004,651 )
How can I increase my downloads?