3 ms·
From wikipedia: In science, researchers commonly report the standard deviation of experimental data, and only effects that fall far outside the range of standar
by stonemetal 17y ago
From wikipedia:
In science, researchers commonly report the standard deviation of experimental data, and only effects that fall far outside the range of standard deviation are considered statistically significant—normal random error or variation in the measurements is in this way distinguished from causal variation.
Thus the results are not statistically significant aka with in normal random error etc. So when did 0.3 of not significant become significant.
- yummyfajitas 17y agoYou are confusing the standard deviation of the sample mean with the standard deviation of the sample. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_limit_theorem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_limit_theorem
- cwan 17y agoMy skills in stats aren't quite current but this was from a large sample size - covering 500 schools and more than 55,000 students. From the wikipedia article on statistical significance (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_significance http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_significance): "Given a sufficiently large sample, extremely small and non-notable differences can be found to be statistically significant, and statistical significance says nothing about the practical significance of a difference." This isn't even "extremely small". From the report: "The mean treatment effect of 0.22 SD is equal to 9 percentile points at the median of a normal distribution. We find a minimum average treatment effect of 0.1 SD at every percentile of baseline test scores, suggesting broad-based gains in test scores as a result of the incentive program."