Abstract
The null-hypothesis significance-test procedure (NHSTP) is
defended in the context of the theory-corroboration experiment, as
well as the following contrasts: (a) substantive hypotheses versus
statistical hypotheses, (b) theory corroboration versus statistical
hypothesis testing, (c) theoretical inference versus statistical
decision, (d) experiments versus nonexperimental studies, and
(e) theory corroboration versus treatment assessment. The null
hypothesis can be true because it is the hypothesis that errors are
randomly distributed in data. Moreover, the null hypothesis is never
used as a categorical proposition. Statistical significance means only
that chance influences can be excluded as an explanation of data; it
does not identify the nonchance factor responsible. The experimental
conclusion is drawn with the inductive principle underlying the
experimental design. A chain of deductive arguments gives rise to the
theoretical conclusion via the experimental conclusion. The anomalous
relationship between statistical significance and the effect size
often used to criticize NHSTP is more apparent than real. The absolute
size of the effect is not an index of evidential support for the
substantive hypothesis. Nor is the effect size, by itself, informative
as to the practical importance of the research result. Being a
conditional probability, statistical power cannot be the a
priori probability of statistical significance. The validity of
statistical power is debatable because statistical significance is
determined with a single sampling distribution of the test statistic
based on H0, whereas it takes two distributions to
represent statistical power or effect size. Sample size should not be
determined in the mechanical manner envisaged in power analysis. It is
inappropriate to criticize NHSTP for nonstatistical reasons. At the
same time, neither effect size, nor confidence interval estimate, nor
posterior probability can be used to exclude chance as an explanation
of data. Neither can any of them fulfill the nonstatistical functions
expected of them by critics.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Behavioral Neuroscience,Physiology,Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology
Cited by
70 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献