Journal Articles
Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://mro.massey.ac.nz/handle/10179/7915
Browse
9 results
Search Results
Item P-values as percentiles. Commentary on: "Null hypothesis significance tests. A mix-up of two different theories: the basis for widespread confusion and numerous misinterpretations".(FRONTIERS RESEARCH FOUNDATION, 2015) Perezgonzalez JDItem Commentary: The Need for Bayesian Hypothesis Testing in Psychological Science.(2017) Perezgonzalez JDItem Fisher, Neyman-Pearson or NHST? A tutorial for teaching data testing.(FRONTIERS RESEARCH FOUNDATION, 2015) Perezgonzalez JDDespite frequent calls for the overhaul of null hypothesis significance testing (NHST), this controversial procedure remains ubiquitous in behavioral, social and biomedical teaching and research. Little change seems possible once the procedure becomes well ingrained in the minds and current practice of researchers; thus, the optimal opportunity for such change is at the time the procedure is taught, be this at undergraduate or at postgraduate levels. This paper presents a tutorial for the teaching of data testing procedures, often referred to as hypothesis testing theories. The first procedure introduced is Fisher's approach to data testing-tests of significance; the second is Neyman-Pearson's approach-tests of acceptance; the final procedure is the incongruent combination of the previous two theories into the current approach-NSHT. For those researchers sticking with the latter, two compromise solutions on how to improve NHST conclude the tutorial.Item Open letter to The Independent - Pilots 'very likely' to misjudge flying conditions due to irrational decisions, revisited(Figshare, 22/12/2016) Perezgonzalez JDStaufenberg’s news article (2016) comments on research reported by Walmsley and Gilbey (2016). An interview with the corresponding author also yielded extra information, especially the verbalization that practically all pilots fell prey to cognitive biases and the hint that pilots were making irrational decisions.In reality, Walmsley and Gilbey’s own results do not support much of the conclusions posed. I have further expanded on information which is specific to Staufenberg’s news article, especially information about minima meteorological conditions for visual flight rules (VFR) flying in the UK, as well as a breakdown of the percentage of pilots in Walmsley and Gilbey’s study which contradicts the information provided.Item Confidence intervals and tests are two sides of the same research question.(FRONTIERS RESEARCH FOUNDATION, 2015) Perezgonzalez JDItem The meaning of significance in data testing.(FRONTIERS MEDIA SA, 2015) Perezgonzalez JDItem Commentary: How Bayes factors change scientific practice(Frontiers Media, 30/09/2016) Perezgonzalez JDDienes's (2016) article is one of the contributions to the special issue “Bayes factors for testing hypotheses in psychological research…” being published by the Journal of Mathematical Psychology. One concern I have with Dienes's article is its “one-size-fits-all” philosophy. A second concern is the reification of Bayes factors as the solution to the credibility crisis. I find it naive that a single approach is still proposed as the one and only tool for testing data. I also find it naive to assume that Bayes factors, with no clear replicability mechanism attached to them, are the ones to resolve the credibility crisis in psychology.Item Sorry to say, but pilots’ decisions were not irrational(British Psychological Society Digest Research, 16/12/2016) Perezgonzalez JDFradera’s Digest (2016) makes for interesting reading both for aviators and cognitive psychologists alike. Fradera reports on a research article by Walmsley and Gilbey (2016) and the Digest seems pretty accurate to the contents commented upon (in a way, thus, whatever praises or criticisms are raised apply equally to the latter article). The Digest is interesting because what it says is quite relevant in principle but rather misleading in practice. That is, the actual results reported by Walmsley and Gilbey, do not seem to support the portrayal of pilots as biased and irrational, a portrayal which originates in the interpretation of those results based on a flawed statistical technique—null hypothesis significance testing, or NHST. In a nutshell, Fradera opted to summarize the interpretation of (some) outputs made by Walmsley and Gilbey instead of re-interpreting those outputs anew within the context of the methodology and the results described in the original article, as I shall argue.Item Commentary: Continuously cumulating meta-analysis and replicability.(FRONTIERS RESEARCH FOUNDATION, 2015) Perezgonzalez JD