RT @JohnMullahy: If you've ever wondered why there is such entrenched tendency to use .05 thresholds for p-values, 95% confidence intervals…
RT @JohnMullahy: An opportune moment to re-up this classic… https://t.co/x6TqfYL9sF https://t.co/nqj1B8ppd6
RT @JohnMullahy: If you've ever wondered why there is such entrenched tendency to use .05 thresholds for p-values, 95% confidence intervals…
RT @JuhaTarkka: What deserves to be called "statistically significant"? Here's a good explanation of the origins of the usual, no doubt som…
What deserves to be called "statistically significant"? Here's a good explanation of the origins of the usual, no doubt somewhat arbitrary practice:
RT @JohnMullahy: If you've ever wondered why there is such entrenched tendency to use .05 thresholds for p-values, 95% confidence intervals…
An opportune moment to re-up this classic… https://t.co/x6TqfYL9sF https://t.co/nqj1B8ppd6
RT @JohnMullahy: If you've ever wondered why there is such entrenched tendency to use .05 thresholds for p-values, 95% confidence intervals…
RT @JohnMullahy: If you've ever wondered why there is such entrenched tendency to use .05 thresholds for p-values, 95% confidence intervals…
RT @JohnMullahy: If you've ever wondered why there is such entrenched tendency to use .05 thresholds for p-values, 95% confidence intervals…
RT @JohnMullahy: If you've ever wondered why there is such entrenched tendency to use .05 thresholds for p-values, 95% confidence intervals…
RT @JohnMullahy: If you've ever wondered why there is such entrenched tendency to use .05 thresholds for p-values, 95% confidence intervals…
RT @JohnMullahy: If you've ever wondered why there is such entrenched tendency to use .05 thresholds for p-values, 95% confidence intervals…
RT @JohnMullahy: If you've ever wondered why there is such entrenched tendency to use .05 thresholds for p-values, 95% confidence intervals…
Fisher didn’t make up 5% as the canonical significance level, and it’s a totally reasonable choice. (And so too is 10%, which got almost equal emphasis from Fisher.) https://t.co/x6adshGZv4
RT @JohnMullahy: If you've ever wondered why there is such entrenched tendency to use .05 thresholds for p-values, 95% confidence intervals…
RT @JohnMullahy: If you've ever wondered why there is such entrenched tendency to use .05 thresholds for p-values, 95% confidence intervals…
RT @JohnMullahy: If you've ever wondered why there is such entrenched tendency to use .05 thresholds for p-values, 95% confidence intervals…
RT @JohnMullahy: If you've ever wondered why there is such entrenched tendency to use .05 thresholds for p-values, 95% confidence intervals…
RT @JohnMullahy: If you've ever wondered why there is such entrenched tendency to use .05 thresholds for p-values, 95% confidence intervals…
RT @JohnMullahy: If you've ever wondered why there is such entrenched tendency to use .05 thresholds for p-values, 95% confidence intervals…
RT @JohnMullahy: If you've ever wondered why there is such entrenched tendency to use .05 thresholds for p-values, 95% confidence intervals…
RT @JohnMullahy: If you've ever wondered why there is such entrenched tendency to use .05 thresholds for p-values, 95% confidence intervals…
RT @JohnMullahy: If you've ever wondered why there is such entrenched tendency to use .05 thresholds for p-values, 95% confidence intervals…
RT @JohnMullahy: If you've ever wondered why there is such entrenched tendency to use .05 thresholds for p-values, 95% confidence intervals…
RT @JohnMullahy: If you've ever wondered why there is such entrenched tendency to use .05 thresholds for p-values, 95% confidence intervals…
If you've ever wondered why there is such entrenched tendency to use .05 thresholds for p-values, 95% confidence intervals, etc., this splendid one-page account by Stephen Stigler is enlightening. https://t.co/HehI4CVVKl https://t.co/d0Y0rSH8hr
RT @OwenOzier: For more on Ronald Fisher and p=0.05 (per conversation with @economeager and @brentdg2): 1. Stigler's open access piece http…
👇🏽
RT @OwenOzier: For more on Ronald Fisher and p=0.05 (per conversation with @economeager and @brentdg2): 1. Stigler's open access piece http…
For more on Ronald Fisher and p=0.05 (per conversation with @economeager and @brentdg2): 1. Stigler's open access piece https://t.co/LVgab7esVG 2. This longer, older, more colorful piece ("he was, let us admit it, a difficult man") (requires JSTOR access):
#Statistics The excellent Stephen Stigler on Fisher and the 5% level http://t.co/zOVAlXhCDC
#Statistics The excellent Stephen Stigler on Fisher and the 5% level http://t.co/zOVAlXhCDC
#Statistics The excellent Stephen Stigler on Fisher and the 5% level http://t.co/zOVAlXhCDC
#Statistics The excellent Stephen Stigler on Fisher and the 5% level http://t.co/zOVAlXhCDC
#Statistics The excellent Stephen Stigler on Fisher and the 5% level http://t.co/zOVAlXhCDC
#Statistics The excellent Stephen Stigler on Fisher and the 5% level http://t.co/zOVAlXhCDC
#Statistics The excellent Stephen Stigler on Fisher and the 5% level http://t.co/zOVAlXhCDC
#Statistics The excellent Stephen Stigler on Fisher and the 5% level http://t.co/zOVAlXhCDC
#Statistics The excellent Stephen Stigler on Fisher and the 5% level http://t.co/zOVAlXhCDC
"Fisher and the 5% level" by S.Stigler (via @stephensenn ) http://t.co/EZbVDhSJ2X
Interesting paper by Stephen Stigler on RA Fisher and the 5% level http://t.co/x0xoN3YdOZ