Statistical significance tests: Equivalence and reverse tests should reduce misinterpretation

BioScience

Volumn 51, Issue 12, 2001, Pages 1051-1057

  Parkhurst, D F ^a  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0035661704     PISSN: 00063568     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1641/0006-3568(2001)051[1051:SSTEAR]2.0.CO;2     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Null hypothesis testing: Problems, prevalence, and an alternative
2. A proposal for interpreting and reporting negative studies
3. APA task force urges a harder look at data
4. Is there a "file drawer problem" in biological research?
5. Bioequivalence trials, intersection-union tests and equivalence confidence sets
6. The initial examination of data
7. The "file drawer problem" of non-significant results: Does it apply to biological research?
8. Assessing effect and no effect with equivalence tests
9. An introduction to Bayesian inference for ecological research and environmental decision-making
10. Confidence intervals rather than P values: Estimation rather than hypothesis testing
11. Species richness of urban forest patches and implications for urban landscape diversity
12. The abuse of power: The pervasive fallacy of power calculations for data analysis
13. Eight common but false objections to the discontinuation of significance testing in the analysis of research data
14. Ockham's razor and Bayesian analysis
15. Equivalence tests can enhance environmental science and management
16. Interpreting failure to reject a null hypothesis
17. Logical Interpretation of Statistical Hypothesis Tests
18. The emperor's new tests
19. Low P-values or narrow confidence intervals: Which are more durable?
20. Statistical significance testing and cumulative knowledge in psychology: Implications for training of researchers
21. On hypothesis testing to determine if the mean of a normal distribution is contained in a known interval
22. Advantages of using regression analysis to calculate results of chronic toxicity tests
23. Abuse of hypothesis testing statistics in ecological risk assessment
24. The philosophy of multiple comparisons
25. Response to T.B.L. Kirkwood on Bioequivalence testing - A need to rethink