4 ms·
>"the standards for what constitutes progress in a field are set according to what the people working in it can do on average." For example, in physics they re
by nonbel 8y ago
>"the standards for what constitutes progress in a field are set according to what the people working in it can do on average."
For example, in physics they require p < 3e-7 for a discovery. While in biology it is p < 0.05 and sometimes even p < .1 is allowed.
- vibrio 8y agoBut very different things are being measured--comparing them this way is very flawed.
- nonbel 8y agoNot sure what you mean but my post was a sarcastic comment about how people choose an arbitrary level of significance so that the "right number" of "discoveries" can be published each year. If there is a lot of data they would have too many "discoveries" (it would seem too easy) so they need a more stringent threshold. If the data is very expensive they would have too few "discoveries" so the threshold gets relaxed.
- vibrio 8y agoPardon, I have a weak ability to detect sarcasm before finishing my first coffee. I fully agree that p-value limits are arbitrary, and what one is examining can greatly impact the interpretation of 'significance' or not. As you imply, data can be inflationary , incrementally increasing in volume and decreasing in value.