Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;EWC3, post: 4540506, member: 93416&quot;]Prof Stephen Gorard:</p><p><br /></p><p>&quot;Assessment of significance cannot be standardised and requires knowledge of an underlying figure that the analyst does not generally have and cannot usually know. Therefore, even if all assumptions are met, the practice of statistical testing in isolation is futile. The question many people then ask in consequence is—what should we do instead? This is, perhaps, the wrong question. Rather, the question could be—why should we expect to treat randomly sampled figures differently from any other kinds of numbers, or any other forms of evidence? What we could do ‘instead’ is use figures in the same way as we would most other data, with care and judgement&quot;</p><p><br /></p><p>Or if you prefer:</p><p><br /></p><p>&quot;Lies, damned lies, and statistics&quot;</p><p><br /></p><p>Rob T[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in