4 ms·
I wonder if, read charitably, the intent is to say with a strong enough effect a small statistic size doesn’t necessarily mean useless. For example, if I remove
by SamoyedFurFluff 5y ago
I wonder if, read charitably, the intent is to say with a strong enough effect a small statistic size doesn’t necessarily mean useless. For example, if I removed the hearts from 9 living people and they all died, I can conclude people need their hearts to live.
- ineedasername 5y agoYes, I try to allow some benefit of the doubt in my comment, but from a doctorate is statistics it's a bit harder to excuse. He doesn't have to make an argument from logical implication, there are perfectly good measures of effect size he could use that would allow him to say something like "not only was this statistically significant but it demonstrated a large effect size as well." My hope is he said something like "We not only saw a P value of < 0.04 but a Cohen's D of 0.7." and then the reporter was like, "yeah I'm gonna need you to dumb that down for our readers"