RT @david_colquhoun: A criticism of my P value paper http://t.co/H1SuRCY5H7 and my response http://t.co/ARHgQ4leEt (original paper http://t…
RT @david_colquhoun: A criticism of my P value paper http://t.co/H1SuRCY5H7 and my response http://t.co/ARHgQ4leEt (original paper http://t…
RT @david_colquhoun: A criticism of my P value paper http://t.co/H1SuRCY5H7 and my response http://t.co/ARHgQ4leEt (original paper http://t…
RT @david_colquhoun: A criticism of my P value paper http://t.co/H1SuRCY5H7 and my response http://t.co/ARHgQ4leEt (original paper http://t…
RT @david_colquhoun: A criticism of my P value paper http://t.co/H1SuRCY5H7 and my response http://t.co/ARHgQ4leEt (original paper http://t…
A criticism of my P value paper http://t.co/H1SuRCY5H7 and my response http://t.co/ARHgQ4leEt (original paper http://t.co/X1NEc1p2Lj )
"If you use p=0.05 to suggest that you have made a discovery, you will be wrong at least 30% of the time" #statistics http://t.co/XGY3SvSOcA
How often do you do 'non-significant' experiments? If you only read one statistical paper in your life, read this: http://t.co/qPW78G73uM
@grahamcmackenzi But if you are interested in stats, you might like http://t.co/X1NEc1p2Lj
RT @raphaels7: @ianlane88 ==> :) @david_colquhoun http://t.co/mqcGCO4h23 "An investigation of the false discovery rate & the misinterpretat…
@ianlane88 ==> :) @david_colquhoun http://t.co/mqcGCO4h23 "An investigation of the false discovery rate & the misinterpretation of p-values"
Statistics: p=5%⇒ at least 28.9% chance of no effect at all (p=0.1%⇒1.84%) (via Sten Rylander http://t.co/IoeJwXss6e) http://t.co/4BSShIIYJw
@mendel_random I guess what set me off was that review uses the word "significant", I think that word should vanish! http://t.co/X1NEc1p2Lj
@mendel_random but the forest plots look very marginal, and P values unimpressive, in light of http://t.co/X1NEc1p2Lj
Amazing. My review on misinterpretion of P values has almost 70,000 full-text views http://t.co/X1NEc1p2Lj (and YouTube verion passed 3000)
Amazing. My review on misinterpretion of P values has almost 70,000 full-text views http://t.co/X1NEc1p2Lj (and YouTube verion passed 3000)
Amazing. My review on misinterpretion of P values has almost 70,000 full-text views http://t.co/X1NEc1p2Lj (and YouTube verion passed 3000)
Amazing. My review on misinterpretion of P values has almost 70,000 full-text views http://t.co/X1NEc1p2Lj (and YouTube verion passed 3000)
Amazing. My review on misinterpretion of P values has almost 70,000 full-text views http://t.co/X1NEc1p2Lj (and YouTube verion passed 3000)
Amazing. My review on misinterpretion of P values has almost 70,000 full-text views http://t.co/X1NEc1p2Lj (and YouTube verion passed 3000)
Watch those false positives... http://t.co/SqEDJetv79
Amazing. My review on misinterpretion of P values has almost 70,000 full-text views http://t.co/X1NEc1p2Lj (and YouTube verion passed 3000)
Amazing. My review on misinterpretion of P values has almost 70,000 full-text views http://t.co/X1NEc1p2Lj (and YouTube verion passed 3000)
Amazing. My review on misinterpretion of P values has almost 70,000 full-text views http://t.co/X1NEc1p2Lj (and YouTube verion passed 3000)
Amazing. My review on misinterpretion of P values has almost 70,000 full-text views http://t.co/X1NEc1p2Lj (and YouTube verion passed 3000)
Amazing. My review on misinterpretion of P values has almost 70,000 full-text views http://t.co/X1NEc1p2Lj (and YouTube verion passed 3000)
Amazing. My review on misinterpretion of P values has almost 70,000 full-text views http://t.co/X1NEc1p2Lj (and YouTube verion passed 3000)
Amazing. My review on misinterpretion of P values has almost 70,000 full-text views http://t.co/X1NEc1p2Lj (and YouTube verion passed 3000)
An investigation of the false discovery rate and the misinterpretation of p-values http://t.co/w5HjpY5568 via @david_colquhoun
Amazing. My review on misinterpretion of P values has almost 70,000 full-text views http://t.co/X1NEc1p2Lj (and YouTube verion passed 3000)
The clearest explanations of the implications of sensitivity & specificity (section 3) I've seen (& for stats geeks) http://t.co/OuWjFbUufV
use p=0.05 to claim you have discovered an effect? then >30% risk of looking foolish Read this http://t.co/Hmss5SdeCp Bravo @david_colquhoun
@richarddmorey because that's what BF is, in this context para A3 it http://t.co/g3RflB7W94 @AlxEtz @EJWagenmakers
@EJWagenmakers so, again, what's your objection to http://t.co/rupxy7oEpv ?@richarddmorey @AlxEtz
@EJWagenmakers so you don't agree with http://t.co/rupxy7oEpv @richarddmorey @AlxEtz @jjjjonathon
@richarddmorey I care a lot about it! http://t.co/X1NEc1p2Lj @AlxEtz @jjjjonathon @EJWagenmakers
@EJWagenmakers I maintain that all you need is rules of conditional probs -nothing subjective http://t.co/X1NEc1p2Lj @AlxEtz @jjjjonathon
@EJWagenmakers What you need to now is false postive rate eg http://t.co/X1NEc1p2Lj @AlxEtz @jjjjonathon @JASPStats
Phenomenal paper "If, as is often the case, experiments are underpowered, you will be wrong most of the time." http://t.co/VP42il5X8W
Great article: Importance of statistical significance testing http://t.co/scYqKu92jW #machinelearning, #bigdata, #datascience, #smartdata
If you use p=0.05 to suggest that you made a discovery, you will be wrong at least 30% of the time. http://t.co/1LmLVCPzu7 (h/t @rocallahan)
If you use p=0.05 to suggest that you made a discovery, you will be wrong at least 30% of the time. http://t.co/1LmLVCPzu7 (h/t @rocallahan)
If you use p=0.05 to suggest that you made a discovery, you will be wrong at least 30% of the time. http://t.co/1LmLVCPzu7 (h/t @rocallahan)
Interesting article about statistical significance (p=0.05) via /r/Homebrewing http://t.co/UN9l2ZIRHa #homebrewing
If you use p=0.05 to suggest that you made a discovery, you will be wrong at least 30% of the time. http://t.co/1LmLVCPzu7 (h/t @rocallahan)
If you use p=0.05 to suggest that you made a discovery, you will be wrong at least 30% of the time. http://t.co/1LmLVCPzu7 (h/t @rocallahan)
If you use p=0.05 to suggest that you made a discovery, you will be wrong at least 30% of the time. http://t.co/1LmLVCPzu7 (h/t @rocallahan)
If you use p=0.05 to suggest that you made a discovery, you will be wrong at least 30% of the time. http://t.co/1LmLVCPzu7 (h/t @rocallahan)
Great article: Importance of statistical significance testing http://t.co/scYqKu92jW #machinelearning, #bigdata, #datascience, #smartdata
worth a read for better science™ : an investigation of the false discovery rate and misinterpretation of p-values > http://t.co/BvcnftQgFC
An investigation of the false discovery rate and the misinterpretation of p-values http://t.co/rY3kmUE5HJ
Great article: Importance of statistical significance testing http://t.co/scYqKu92jW #machinelearning, #bigdata, #datascience, #smartdata
Great article: Importance of statistical significance testing http://t.co/scYqKu92jW #machinelearning, #bigdata, #datascience, #smartdata
Great article: Importance of statistical significance testing http://t.co/scYqKu92jW #machinelearning, #bigdata, #datascience, #smartdata
Great article: Importance of statistical significance testing http://t.co/scYqKu92jW #machinelearning, #bigdata, #datascience, #smartdata
Great article: Importance of statistical significance testing http://t.co/scYqKu92jW #machinelearning, #bigdata, #datascience, #smartdata
Truth about p: "If you use p=0.05 to suggest that you've made a discovery, you'll be wrong at least 30% of the time" http://t.co/HmXrA2ppGX
Great article: Importance of statistical significance testing http://t.co/scYqKu92jW #machinelearning, #bigdata, #datascience, #smartdata
Great article: Importance of statistical significance testing http://t.co/scYqKu92jW #machinelearning, #bigdata, #datascience, #smartdata
A fantastic article on what's wrong with way the p-value is (ab)used. http://t.co/NAsk8jkcKE
Don't tell anyone in psych: "If you use p=0.05 to suggest a discovery, you will be wrong at least 30% of the time" http://t.co/qPKubEvVyH
Truth about p: "If you use p=0.05 to suggest that you've made a discovery, you'll be wrong at least 30% of the time" http://t.co/HmXrA2ppGX
Truth about p: "If you use p=0.05 to suggest that you've made a discovery, you'll be wrong at least 30% of the time" http://t.co/HmXrA2ppGX
Truth about p: "If you use p=0.05 to suggest that you've made a discovery, you'll be wrong at least 30% of the time" http://t.co/HmXrA2ppGX
Truth about p: "If you use p=0.05 to suggest that you've made a discovery, you'll be wrong at least 30% of the time" http://t.co/HmXrA2ppGX
This is an aggressive, entertaining and very interesting piece about current statistical practices http://t.co/lTXwbBjfXz
Don't tell anyone in psych: "If you use p=0.05 to suggest a discovery, you will be wrong at least 30% of the time" http://t.co/qPKubEvVyH
Don't tell anyone in psych: "If you use p=0.05 to suggest a discovery, you will be wrong at least 30% of the time" http://t.co/qPKubEvVyH
Truth about p: "If you use p=0.05 to suggest that you've made a discovery, you'll be wrong at least 30% of the time" http://t.co/HmXrA2ppGX
Truth about p: "If you use p=0.05 to suggest that you've made a discovery, you'll be wrong at least 30% of the time" http://t.co/HmXrA2ppGX
Truth about p: "If you use p=0.05 to suggest that you've made a discovery, you'll be wrong at least 30% of the time" http://t.co/HmXrA2ppGX
Truth about p: "If you use p=0.05 to suggest that you've made a discovery, you'll be wrong at least 30% of the time" http://t.co/HmXrA2ppGX
Truth about p: "If you use p=0.05 to suggest that you've made a discovery, you'll be wrong at least 30% of the time" http://t.co/HmXrA2ppGX
Truth about p: "If you use p=0.05 to suggest that you've made a discovery, you'll be wrong at least 30% of the time" http://t.co/HmXrA2ppGX
Truth about p: "If you use p=0.05 to suggest that you've made a discovery, you'll be wrong at least 30% of the time" http://t.co/HmXrA2ppGX
Why using p=0.05 can lead to you being wrong >30% of the time. Nice paper by @david_colquhoun http://t.co/VgOjqwbGVL via @alexeidrummond
@stephanneuhaus1 @steamtraen efficiency hardly matters fr ths prob The R for http://t.co/X1NEc1p2Lj was my first attempt -feel free to crit
Truth about p: "If you use p=0.05 to suggest that you've made a discovery, you'll be wrong at least 30% of the time" http://t.co/HmXrA2ppGX
"The reluctance of journals & authors to publish neg. results biases the whole literature in favour of pos. results."http://t.co/w0fc7JOkhQ
Truth about p: "If you use p=0.05 to suggest that you've made a discovery, you'll be wrong at least 30% of the time" http://t.co/HmXrA2ppGX
'to keep false discovery rate <5%, need to use a three-sigma rule, or p≤0.001. And never use the word ‘significant’. http://t.co/d6RaDoIdKW
Truth about p: "If you use p=0.05 to suggest that you've made a discovery, you'll be wrong at least 30% of the time" http://t.co/HmXrA2ppGX
Truth about p: "If you use p=0.05 to suggest that you've made a discovery, you'll be wrong at least 30% of the time" http://t.co/HmXrA2ppGX
Truth about p: "If you use p=0.05 to suggest that you've made a discovery, you'll be wrong at least 30% of the time" http://t.co/HmXrA2ppGX
Truth about p: "If you use p=0.05 to suggest that you've made a discovery, you'll be wrong at least 30% of the time" http://t.co/HmXrA2ppGX
Truth about p: "If you use p=0.05 to suggest that you've made a discovery, you'll be wrong at least 30% of the time" http://t.co/HmXrA2ppGX
Truth about p: "If you use p=0.05 to suggest that you've made a discovery, you'll be wrong at least 30% of the time" http://t.co/HmXrA2ppGX
Truth about p: "If you use p=0.05 to suggest that you've made a discovery, you'll be wrong at least 30% of the time" http://t.co/HmXrA2ppGX
Why using p=0.05 can lead to you being wrong >30% of the time. Nice paper by @david_colquhoun http://t.co/VgOjqwbGVL via @alexeidrummond
I'm over the moon! The great David Cox described my P vlaue paper as "insightful and well worth emphasizing" http://t.co/X1NEc1p2Lj
Truth about p: "If you use p=0.05 to suggest that you've made a discovery, you'll be wrong at least 30% of the time" http://t.co/HmXrA2ppGX
Why using p=0.05 can lead to you being wrong >30% of the time. Nice paper by @david_colquhoun http://t.co/VgOjqwbGVL via @alexeidrummond
Truth about p: "If you use p=0.05 to suggest that you've made a discovery, you'll be wrong at least 30% of the time" http://t.co/HmXrA2ppGX
If I was still at #UniofOxford in #OPIG ( https://t.co/BZdRuR49Ad ) this is the paper I would present at #JournalClub http://t.co/1QUUYy9czN
I'm over the moon! The great David Cox described my P vlaue paper as "insightful and well worth emphasizing" http://t.co/X1NEc1p2Lj
I'm over the moon! The great David Cox described my P vlaue paper as "insightful and well worth emphasizing" http://t.co/X1NEc1p2Lj
Truth about p: "If you use p=0.05 to suggest that you've made a discovery, you'll be wrong at least 30% of the time" http://t.co/HmXrA2ppGX
Truth about p: "If you use p=0.05 to suggest that you've made a discovery, you'll be wrong at least 30% of the time" http://t.co/HmXrA2ppGX
Truth about p: "If you use p=0.05 to suggest that you've made a discovery, you'll be wrong at least 30% of the time" http://t.co/HmXrA2ppGX
Truth about p: "If you use p=0.05 to suggest that you've made a discovery, you'll be wrong at least 30% of the time" http://t.co/HmXrA2ppGX