Jerry Dallal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in sci.stat.edu:
>"Robert J. MacG. Dawson" wrote:
>
>> > > But I don't see why either the advertiser or the consumer advocate
>> > would, or should, do a two-tailed test.
>>
>> The idea is that the "product" of these tests is a p-value to be used
>> in support of an argument. The evidence for the proposal is not made any
>> stronger by the tester's wish for a certain outcome; so the tester
>> should not artificially halve the reported p-value.
>>
>> Superficially, the idea of halving your p-values, doubling your chance
>> of reporting a "statistically significant" result in your favored
>> direction if there is really nothing there, and as a bonus, doing a
>> David-and-Uriah job ("And he wrote in the letter, saying, Set ye Uriah
>> in the forefront of the hottest battle, and retire ye from him, that he
>> may be smitten, and die.") on any possible finding in the other
>> direction, may seem attractive. A moment's thought should persuade us
>> that it is not ethical.
>>
>> -Robert Dawson
>
>I'm not sure I understand the argument,
Oh good -- I thought it was just me!
--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA
http://oakroadsystems.com
My reply address is correct as is. The courtesy of providing a correct
reply address is more important to me than time spent deleting spam.
=================================================================
Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES are available at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
=================================================================
