Sandbox: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mNo edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
[http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/19/opinion/19berkley.html?scp=1&sq=seth%20berkley&st New York Times] | [http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/19/opinion/19berkley.html?scp=1&sq=seth%20berkley&st New York Times] | ||
OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR | OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR<r> | ||
Have Faith in an AIDS Vaccine | Have Faith in an AIDS Vaccine<b | ||
By SETH BERKLEY | By SETH BERKLEY | ||
Revision as of 21:04, 24 October 2009
This illustrates why the controversy over statistical significance is exaggerated. Whether you consider the first or second analysis, the observed effect of the Thai candidates was either just above or below the level of statistical significance. Statisticians will tell you it is possible to observe an effect and have reason to think it’s real even if it’s not statistically significant. And if you think it’s real, you ought to examine it carefully.
New York Times OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR<r> Have Faith in an AIDS Vaccine<b
By SETH BERKLEY