P-value discourse seems to focus on the hackable nature of significance testing. But shouldn't the bigger point that p-values are necessary but insufficient criteria? Being distinguishable from noise is the lowest possible form of scientific rigor.
-
-
He also pointed out George Miller's influential "7 ± 2" paper cited 13 papers using parameter-estimation, and 2 papers using hypothesis-testing. It's not just about reproducibility -- history suggests that building actual models produces more *useful* results.
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.
cognitive psychology. PhD