Posts Tagged ‘ science communication ’

The ASA Document on P-Values: One Year On

March 8, 2017
By
The ASA Document on P-Values: One Year On

I’m surprised it’s a year already since posting my published comments on the ASA Document on P-Values. Since then, there have been a slew of papers rehearsing the well-worn fallacies of tests (a tad bit more than the usual rate). Doubtless, the P-value Pow Wow raised people’s consciousnesses. I’m interested in hearing reader reactions/experiences in connection with […]

Read more »

Don’t throw out the error control baby with the bad statistics bathwater

March 7, 2016
By
Don’t throw out the error control baby with the bad statistics bathwater

My invited comments on the ASA Document on P-values* The American Statistical Association is to be credited with opening up a discussion into p-values; now an examination of the foundations of other key statistical concepts is needed. Statistical significance tests are a small part of a rich set of “techniques for systematically appraising and bounding […]

Read more »

“What does it say about our national commitment to research integrity?”

November 14, 2015
By
“What does it say about our national commitment to research integrity?”

There’s an important guest editorial by Keith Baggerly and C.K. Gunsalus in today’s issue of the Cancer Letter: “Penalty Too Light” on the Duke U. (Potti/Nevins) cancer trial fraud*. Here are some excerpts. publication date: Nov 13, 2015 Penalty Too Light What does it say about our national commitment to research integrity that the Department of […]

Read more »

Are scientists really ready for ‘retraction offsets’ to advance ‘aggregate reproducibility’? (let alone ‘precautionary withdrawals’)

April 1, 2015
By
Are scientists really ready for ‘retraction offsets’ to advance ‘aggregate reproducibility’? (let alone ‘precautionary withdrawals’)

Given recent evidence of the irreproducibility of a surprising number of published scientific findings, the White House’s Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) sought ideas for “leveraging its role as a significant funder of scientific research to most effectively address the problem”, and announced funding for projects to “reset the self-corrective process of scientific […]

Read more »

2015 Saturday Night Brainstorming and Task Forces: (4th draft)

February 1, 2015
By
2015 Saturday Night Brainstorming and Task Forces: (4th draft)

Saturday Night Brainstorming: The TFSI on NHST–part reblog from here and here, with a substantial 2015 update! Each year leaders of the movement to “reform” statistical methodology in psychology, social science, and other areas of applied statistics get together around this time for a brainstorming session. They review the latest from the Task Force on Statistical […]

Read more »

Significance Levels are Made a Whipping Boy on Climate Change Evidence: Is .05 Too Strict? (Schachtman on Oreskes)

January 4, 2015
By
Significance Levels are Made a Whipping Boy on Climate Change Evidence: Is .05 Too Strict? (Schachtman on Oreskes)

Given the daily thrashing significance tests receive because of how preposterously easy it is claimed to satisfy the .05 significance level requirement, it’s surprising[i] to hear Naomi Oreskes blaming the .05 standard as demanding too high a burden of proof for accepting climate change. “Playing Dumb on Climate Change,” N.Y. Times Sunday Rev. at 2 (Jan. 4, 2015). Is there anything […]

Read more »

Msc. Kvetch: What does it mean for a battle to be “lost by the media”?

December 11, 2014
By
Msc. Kvetch: What does it mean for a battle to be “lost by the media”?

1.  What does it mean for a debate to be “media driven” or a battle to be “lost by the media”? In my last post, I noted that until a few weeks ago, I’d never heard of a “power morcellator.” Nor had I heard of the AAGL–The American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists. In an article “Battle over […]

Read more »

Some ironies in the ‘replication crisis’ in social psychology (4th and final installment)

July 1, 2014
By
Some ironies in the ‘replication crisis’ in social psychology (4th and final installment)

There are some ironic twists in the way social psychology is dealing with its “replication crisis”, and they may well threaten even the most sincere efforts to put the field on firmer scientific footing–precisely in those areas that evoked the call for a “daisy chain” of replications. Two articles, one from the Guardian (June 14), and a second from […]

Read more »

“The medical press must become irrelevant to publication of clinical trials.”

June 9, 2014
By
“The medical press must become irrelevant to publication of clinical trials.”

“The medical press must become irrelevant to publication of clinical trials.” So said Stephen Senn at a recent meeting of the Medical Journalists’ Association with the title: “Is the current system of publishing clinical trials fit for purpose?” Senn has thrown a few stones in the direction of medical journals in guest posts on this […]

Read more »

Reliability and Reproducibility: Fraudulent p-values through multiple testing (and other biases): S. Stanley Young (Phil 6334: Day#13)

April 27, 2014
By
Reliability and Reproducibility: Fraudulent p-values through multiple testing (and other biases):  S. Stanley Young (Phil 6334: Day#13)

S. Stanley Young, PhD Assistant Director for Bioinformatics National Institute of Statistical Sciences Research Triangle Park, NC Here are Dr. Stanley Young’s slides from our April 25 seminar. They contain several tips for unearthing deception by fraudulent p-value reports. Since it’s Saturday night, you might wish to perform an experiment with three 10-sided dice*,recording the results of 100 rolls (3 at a time) […]

Read more »


Subscribe

Email:

  Subscribe