Timeline for Is it possible to prove a null hypothesis?
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 12, 2014 at 12:17 | comment | added | user37312 | Is this equivalent to assuming "not the null" as the new null hypothesis and then rejecting this new null hypothesis? | |
| Feb 11, 2011 at 4:46 | comment | added | Jeromy Anglim | this question on equivalence testing also has some good suggestions stats.stackexchange.com/questions/3038/… | |
| Jan 15, 2011 at 6:57 | vote | accept | Pulkit Sinha | ||
| Jan 14, 2011 at 23:49 | comment | added | dmk38 | couple more things: (1) Treating failure to reject the null as evidence in support of null is a shockingly common error & usual occasion for Streiner's point. This mistake essentially turns the strong aversion to type 1 error in "p < 0.05" norm into license to make type 2. S says, "wait--you need power..." (2) Whuber cites Hume's famous argument. H's pt is actually just as subversive of empirical proofs rejecting the null as of proofs of the null. H says induction can't support causal inference. Ok; but there's no alternative for empirical study! Go Pearl (& Bayes), not Hume, on causality! | |
| Jan 14, 2011 at 9:18 | comment | added | chl | (+1) Nice answer. I added a link to an online version of Streiner's article; I hope you don't mind (feel free to remove). | |
| Jan 14, 2011 at 9:17 | history | edited | chl | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
add link to ungated PDF
|
| Jan 14, 2011 at 4:50 | history | edited | dmk38 | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
missing word
|
| Jan 14, 2011 at 0:47 | comment | added | whuber♦ | +1. This is a nice example of the importance of being clear about one's standard of "proof." In many applications the one you invoke here--the "act as if" standard, if I may call it that--is so weak that nobody would accept it as "proof." I do not deny its utility, though, and advocate this kind of approach to support rational decision making. (But maybe Bayesian methods are better... :-) | |
| Jan 13, 2011 at 23:51 | history | answered | dmk38 | CC BY-SA 2.5 |