The Incompleteness of Probability Models and the Resultant Implications for Theories of Statistical Inference
- 2 August 2002
- journal article
- Published by Taylor & Francis in Understanding Statistics
- Vol. 1 (3) , 167-189
- https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328031us0103_03
Abstract
It is argued that statistical testing has been overvalued because it is perceived as an optimal, objective, algorithmic method of testing hypotheses. Researchers need to be made aware of the subjective nature of statistical inference in order not to make too much of it. Examples are given of aspects of data that are ignored in the computation of p values but are relevant to their interpretation. These include the fit of the chance distribution, the presence of influential points, the possibilities for post hoc selectivity, the presence of expected and unexpected trends in the data, and the amount of sampling variability that is present. Researchers should be taught that although probabilistic reasoning is a deductive process, making inferences from data is not. There is always potentially relevant information available over and above that which has been taken account of by any p value. Indeed, it is noted that a probability can never characterize all the uncertainty regarding an event because of problems ...This publication has 34 references indexed in Scilit:
- Narrow and shallow.American Psychologist, 2000
- Writing for EpidemiologyEpidemiology, 1998
- The earth is round (p < .05).American Psychologist, 1994
- The unicorn, the normal curve, and other improbable creatures.Psychological Bulletin, 1989
- Parametric statistics and levels of measurement.Psychological Bulletin, 1988
- Why probabilistic support is not inductivePhilosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, 1987
- The test of significance in psychological research.Psychological Bulletin, 1966
- Note on a Conditional Property of Student's $t^1$The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 1963
- REVIEWSBiometrika, 1947
- THE FIDUCIAL ARGUMENT IN STATISTICAL INFERENCEAnnals of Eugenics, 1935