论p值阈值和α-水平——两种不同的鱼

IF 0.7 4区 经济学 Q4 AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY
N. Hirschauer, Sven Gruener, O. Musshoff, C. Becker
{"title":"论p值阈值和α-水平——两种不同的鱼","authors":"N. Hirschauer, Sven Gruener, O. Musshoff, C. Becker","doi":"10.31235/osf.io/d46m2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It has often been noted that the “null-hypothesis-significance-testing” (NHST) framework is an inconsistent hybrid of Neyman-Pearson’s “hypothesis testing” and Fisher’s “significance testing” that almost inevitably causes misinterpretations. To facilitate a realistic assessment of the potential and the limits of statistical inference, we briefly recall widespread inferential errors and outline the two original approaches of these famous statisticians. Based on the understanding of their irreconcilable perspectives, we propose “going back to the roots” and using the initial evidence in the data in terms of the size and the uncertainty of the estimate for the purpose of statistical inference. Finally, we make six propositions that hopefully contribute to improving the quality of inferences in future research.","PeriodicalId":48919,"journal":{"name":"German Journal of Agricultural Economics","volume":"79 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Primer on p-Value Thresholds and α-Levels – Two Different Kettles of Fish\",\"authors\":\"N. Hirschauer, Sven Gruener, O. Musshoff, C. Becker\",\"doi\":\"10.31235/osf.io/d46m2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"It has often been noted that the “null-hypothesis-significance-testing” (NHST) framework is an inconsistent hybrid of Neyman-Pearson’s “hypothesis testing” and Fisher’s “significance testing” that almost inevitably causes misinterpretations. To facilitate a realistic assessment of the potential and the limits of statistical inference, we briefly recall widespread inferential errors and outline the two original approaches of these famous statisticians. Based on the understanding of their irreconcilable perspectives, we propose “going back to the roots” and using the initial evidence in the data in terms of the size and the uncertainty of the estimate for the purpose of statistical inference. Finally, we make six propositions that hopefully contribute to improving the quality of inferences in future research.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48919,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"German Journal of Agricultural Economics\",\"volume\":\"79 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-09-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"German Journal of Agricultural Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/d46m2\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"German Journal of Agricultural Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/d46m2","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

人们经常注意到,“零假设-显著性检验”(NHST)框架是内曼-皮尔逊(Neyman-Pearson)的“假设检验”和费雪(Fisher)的“显著性检验”的不一致混合体,几乎不可避免地会导致误解。为了便于对统计推断的潜力和局限性进行现实的评估,我们简要回顾了普遍存在的推断错误,并概述了这些著名统计学家的两种原始方法。基于对两者不可调和的观点的理解,我们提出“回到根源”,在估计的大小和不确定性方面使用数据中的初始证据进行统计推断。最后,我们提出了六个建议,希望有助于提高未来研究的推论质量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Primer on p-Value Thresholds and α-Levels – Two Different Kettles of Fish
It has often been noted that the “null-hypothesis-significance-testing” (NHST) framework is an inconsistent hybrid of Neyman-Pearson’s “hypothesis testing” and Fisher’s “significance testing” that almost inevitably causes misinterpretations. To facilitate a realistic assessment of the potential and the limits of statistical inference, we briefly recall widespread inferential errors and outline the two original approaches of these famous statisticians. Based on the understanding of their irreconcilable perspectives, we propose “going back to the roots” and using the initial evidence in the data in terms of the size and the uncertainty of the estimate for the purpose of statistical inference. Finally, we make six propositions that hopefully contribute to improving the quality of inferences in future research.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
German Journal of Agricultural Economics
German Journal of Agricultural Economics AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY-
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
20.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The GJAE publishes a broad range of theoretical, applied and policy-related articles. It aims for a balanced coverage of economic issues within agricultural and food production, demand and trade, rural development, and sustainable and efficient resource use as well as specific German or European issues. The GJAE also welcomes review articles.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信