On Thu, 20 Apr 2000 10:48:38 +0100, "P.G.Hamer"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
< snip, interesting stuff about, proper age-adjusted life-tables,
with proper adjustment of base-line Ns, would not show an increase in
competing causes of death >
> BTW an even greater problem in animal testing seems to
Jerry Dallal wrote:
> As Tukey has pointed out, the null hypothesis of no effect
> is not that we think there is no effect, but we are uncertain
> of the direction.
>
> I wish I knew more about Delany and its application.
> One problem, pointed out by David Salsburg, is that a
> substances that e
Herman Rubin wrote:
>
> The truth myth is highly persistent. We have the Delaney
> Clause, which requires the FDA to ban any additive "which
> has been found to cause cancer in humans or animals".
> Now what does this mean? It is unlikely that anything
> does not affect the cancer rate.
>
> We
In article <634D48D1362BD311AC7400508B1047DA912E82@EXCHANGE>,
Silvert, Henry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I would go a little further. It is the perpetuation of the idea that there
>is some truth out there that has to be found that makes statistics and the
>sciences so alienating to mopst people. W
MAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Hypothesis testing and magic - episode 2
>
> > Truth has nothing to do with it. We contruct stories of how the universe
> operates -
> > we call these stories 'theories' or 'models'. Significance testing is
> one
> w
- Original Message -
From: Michael Granaas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: EDSTAT list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2000 8:23 AM
Subject: Re: Hypothesis testing and magic - episode 2
> In addition to defining the variables some areas do a better job of
> defi
> Truth has nothing to do with it. We contruct stories of how the universe
operates -
> we call these stories 'theories' or 'models'. Significance testing is one
way in
> which we choose between stories as to which is (probably) more useful in a
> specified context.
--
> Alan McLean ([EMAIL PROTEC
Spot on, Michael.
Michael Granaas wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Apr 2000, dennis roberts wrote:
>
> > At 10:23 AM 4/13/00 -0500, Michael Granaas wrote:
> >
> > >In addition to defining the variables some areas do a better job of
> > >defining and therefore testing their models. The ag example is one wher
dennis roberts wrote:
> but, if we follow this to some logical conclusion ... this could be
> rephrased as meaning ...
>
> situations where you have essentially complete control over variable
> manipulation = situations where you can establish 'the truth' (in
> terms of the impacts of these
Hi Michael,
This sounds to me like lousy experimental design. Surely the purpose of the
experiment is to distinguish between competing theoretical models?
Michael Granaas wrote:
> But in some areas in psychology you will have a situation where many
> theoretical perspectives predict the same ou
On Thu, 13 Apr 2000, dennis roberts wrote:
> At 10:23 AM 4/13/00 -0500, Michael Granaas wrote:
>
> >In addition to defining the variables some areas do a better job of
> >defining and therefore testing their models. The ag example is one where
> >not only the variables are relatively clear so a
At 10:23 AM 4/13/00 -0500, Michael Granaas wrote:
>In addition to defining the variables some areas do a better job of
>defining and therefore testing their models. The ag example is one where
>not only the variables are relatively clear so are the models. That is
>there is one highly plausible
At 08:37 AM 4/13/00 -0400, Art Kendall wrote:
>in the "harder to do" sciences it is common to distinguish an experiment
>from a
>quasi-experiment.
>
>Part of the difficulty of these fields is that we can not (or ethically may
>not) manipulate many independent variables. Therefore we lose the opp
On Thu, 13 Apr 2000, Alan McLean wrote:
> Some more comments on hypothesis testing:
>
> My impression of the hypothesis test controversy, which seems to exist
> primarily in the areas of psychology, education and the like is that it
> is at least partly a consequence of the sheer difficulty o
in the "harder to do" sciences it is common to distinguish an experiment from a
quasi-experiment.
Part of the difficulty of these fields is that we can not (or ethically may
not) manipulate many independent variables. Therefore we lose the opportunity
to assert "et ceteris paribus" "everything e
At 09:30 AM 4/13/00 +1000, Alan McLean wrote:
>In the soft sciences it is easy enough to identify a characteristic of
>interest
alan makes good points as usual ... but i totally object to the term 'soft'
sciences ...
what does soft imply? that the science is bad ... or, that merely that
va
Some more comments on hypothesis testing:
My impression of the hypothesis test controversy, which seems to exist
primarily in the areas of psychology, education and the like (this is
coming from someone who has been involved in education for all my
working life, but with a scientific/mathematic
17 matches
Mail list logo
