In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
dennis roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>At 12:09 AM 3/5/01 -0500, Donald Burrill wrote:
>>Well, no. Overrated it may be (that lies, I think, in the eye of the
>>beholder); but a _decision_ it is definitely not. Power is the
>>_probability_ of making a particu
I think the problem that most students have is that they
think we can know whether we've made an error. I use the courtroom
analogy to clarify that we can never know for sure. You might
convict an innocent person or find a guilty person innocent, and we can't
know the true state of the world.
A
the "act" of "deciding" (using whatever rule/CV you like) to retain the
null or reject the null ... is just that and nothing more
however, you do NOT "act" or "decide" to make a type II error or a type I
error ...
you don't "act" or "decide" to make an incorrect or correct choice ... the
fact
In response to Dennis's earlier statement,
"that is ... power in many cases is a highly overrated CORRECT decision"
I wrote:
> >Well, no. Overrated it may be (that lies, I think, in the eye of the
> >beholder); but a _decision_ it is definitely not. Power is the
> >_probability_ of making a
Okay, I'll chime in a bit here:
I like the notion of seperating out the "state of affairs" from
probabilities as Don suggests...I've never seen it done this way before,
but I have seen some students confused with what should be pretty simple
stuff...I will be trying this material as two tables t
At 12:09 AM 3/5/01 -0500, Donald Burrill wrote:
>Well, no. Overrated it may be (that lies, I think, in the eye of the
>beholder); but a _decision_ it is definitely not. Power is the
>_probability_ of making a particular decision -- which, of course, like
>all decisions, may or may not be corre
On Sun, 4 Mar 2001, dennis roberts wrote in part:
> i know that sometimes power is "defined" as 1 - beta ... but, beta
> could therefore (algebraically and logically) be defined as 1 - power
Only for the conditional definition of power; I would wish to add the
conditional clause "when the nu
Dennis wants a name for the probability of correctly retaining a true null
hypothesis, and Don likes to think of these probabilities as unconditional,
so why not just call the probability of correctly retaining a true null
hypothesis by its most likely *unconditional* value, ZERO. ;-) Sorry, I
j
At 03:08 AM 3/4/01 -0500, Donald Burrill wrote:
>Do you have a reasoned objection to "1 - alpha"? In other contexts we
>routinely use, e.g., "1 - Rsq" for the proportion of variance unexplained
>by the model being considered. The "1 minus" construction shows the
>logical and arithmetical con
On Sat, 3 Mar 2001, dennis roberts wrote:
> when we discuss things like power, beta, type I error, etc. ... we
> often show a 2 by 2 table ... similar to
>
> null truenull false
>
> retain correct type II, beta
>
> reject type I, alpha po
when we discuss things like power, beta, type I error, etc. ... we often
show a 2 by 2 table ... similar to
null truenull false
retain correct type II, beta
reject type I, alpha power
i think that we need a bit of overhaul to this typi
11 matches
Mail list logo
