Zum Seitenende Übersicht Artikel Home & Impressum
First the link to this week’s complete list as HTML and as PDF.
If someone tells me, his result “was achieved through Microsoft Excel 2003’s summation function”, which is more or less what Jennings & Waters do, I know, he has not understood simple addition. What they offer is junior high school stuff: Throwing a dice n times, what is the probability never to get a single six? Like not finding a rare tool in a small sample this too rapidly diminishes with sample size. Also where they state “A p-value of .05 or less”, “99.05 or more” is what they should have said given the equation they supply. Again, those two mistakes can and will happen but what about the second author, several referees and editor, are they all innumerate or fast asleep? Given all that, even claiming “the principal of parsimony” as a coauthor doesn’t help much. (scnr)
While Joel & Tarrasch’s criticism is relevant and valid for about 90 % of the psychological literature I see, it isn’t here. Where it comes to men and women even small differences in population averages tend to be important enough to make them compete in different leagues in sports.
Zum Anfang Übersicht Artikel Home & Impressum