Oh no! They screwed up both p-value and p-hacking. (Usually p-hacking is done by cherry-picking data or cherry-picking the method for analyzing the data, not by manipulating data.)https://twitter.com/JennCVeilleux/status/1188973832633233408 …
-
removing elements deliberately from data is manipulating data - in my book.
If you are good at this then you don't remove elements from a data set ever. That would be considered manipulation. You either cherry-pick what to include in the first place, or (more common) you just produce many independent data sets and then only publish the one with p<0.05.
-
-
which both falls under removing data from the entirety - and thus manipulation of the data IMHO. designing the tests so that no bad result data is created at all would be different... but then again, they had way less space than a tweet to "define" it :)
-
I think we'll have to disagree on the meaning of "manipulation of data". Of course it's wrong to misrepresent the context of an experiment by, for example, failing to mention the 19 similar experiments one conducted with inconclusive results, but I wouldn't call that manip of dat
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.