Hypothesis Testing and Theory Evaluation at the Boundaries: Surprising Insights from Bayes's Theorem

Psychological Review

Volumn 110, Issue 3, 2003, Pages 526-535

  Trafimow, David ^a  

^a NEW MEXICO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BAYES THEOREM; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; PSYCHOLOGY; REVIEW; STATISTICAL MODEL;

BAYES THEOREM; HUMANS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; PSYCHOLOGY; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 0042264970     PISSN: 0033295X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.526     Document Type: Review

References (25)

1. Abelson, R. P. (1997). A retrospective on the significance test ban of 1999 (If there were no significance tests, they would be invented). In L. Harlow, S. A. Mulaik, & J. H. Steiger (Eds.), What if there were no significance tests? (pp. 117-141). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
2. Bakan, D. (1966). The test of significance in psychological research. Psychological Bulletin, 66, 423-437.
3. Chow, S. L. (1998). Précis of statistical significance: Rationale, validity, and utility. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 21, 169-239.
4. Cohen, J. (1994). The earth is round (p < .05). American Psychologist, 49, 997-1003.
5. Faust, D. (1984). The limits of scientific reasoning. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
6. Gergen, K. J. (1978). Toward generative theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 1344-1360.
7. Gigerenzer, G. (1998). Surrogates for theories. Theory and Psychology, 8, 195-204.
8. Hagen, R. L. (1997). In praise of the null hypothesis statistical test. American Psychologist, 52, 15-24.
9. Hempel, C. G. (1965). Aspects of scientific explanation, and other essays in the philosophy of science. New York: Free Press.
10. Lakatos, I. (1978). The methodology of scientific research programmes. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
11. Meehl, P. E. (1990). Appraising and amending theories: The strategy of Lakatosian defense and two principles that warrant using it. Psychological Inquiry, 1, 108-141.
12. Meehl, P. E. (1997). The problem is epistemology, not statistics: Replace significance tests by confidence intervals and quantify accuracy of risky numerical predictions. In L. Harlow, S. A. Mulaik, & J. H. Steiger (Eds.), What if there were no significance tests? (pp. 393-425). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
13. Mulaik, S. A., Raju, N. S., & Harshman, R. A. (1997). There is a time and place for significance testing. In L. Harlow, S. A. Mulaik, & J. H. Steiger (Eds.), What if there were no significance tests? (pp. 65-115). Mahwah, NJ; Erlbaum.
14. Platt, J. R. (1964). Strong inference. Science, 146, 347-353.
15. Popper, K. R. (1959). The logic of scientific discovery. New York: Basic Books. (Original work published 1934)
16. Popper, K. R. (1962). Conjectures and refutations. New York: Basic Books.
17. Roberts, S., & Pashler, H. (2000). How persuasive is a good fit? A comment on theory testing. Psychological Review, 107, 358-367.
18. Rozeboom, W. W. (1960). The fallacy of the null-hypothesis significance test. Psychological Bulletin, 57, 416-428.
19. Rozeboom, W. W. (1997). Good science is abductive, not hypothetico-deductive. In L. Harlow, S. A. Mulaik, & J. H. Steiger (Eds.), What if there were no significance tests? (pp. 335-391). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
20. Schaller, M., & Crandall, C. S. (1998). On the purposes served by psychological research and its critics. Theory and Psychology, 8, 205-212.
21. Schmidt, F. L. (1996). Statistical significance testing and cumulative knowledge in psychology: Implications for the training of researchers. Psychological Methods, 1, 115-129.
22. Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (1997). Eight objections to the discontinuation of significance testing in the analysis of research data. In L. Harlow, S. A. Mulaik, & J. H. Steiger (Eds.), What if there were no significance tests? (pp. 37-64). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
23. Wallach, L., & Wallach, M. A. (2001). Experiments in social psychology: Science or self-deception? Theory and Psychology, 11, 451-473.
24. Wallach, M. A., & Wallach, L. (1998). When experiments serve little purposes: Misguided research in mainstream psychology. Theory and Psychology, 8, 183-194.
25. Wilkinson, L., & The Task Force on Statistical Inference. (1999). Statistical methods in psychology journals: Guidelines and explanations. American Psychologist, 54, 594-604.