April 30th, 2007
Dearest Deirdre, Not for publication, obviously – just the quickest means of communication as our email is down over the whole 5-day long weekend. I’ve just read your revised “Signifying Nothing”. Slowly(!), in order to understand as well as possible outside my own “world”. If I’m reading correctly, I think you might like to re-proof (more…)
By
Journal staff in
Statistical Significance, Writing |
1 Comment »
December 20th, 2010
— About The Cult of Statistical Significance — See summary paper, “The Cult of Statistical Significance” — StatLit website
By
Journal staff in
McCloskey's Books, Statistical Significance |
No Comments »
January 5th, 2011
Below is a reprint from Mark Thoma’s Economist‘s View: “Does Statistical Significance Stink?” by Steve Ziliak on 5 Jan. 2010. Does Statistical Significance Stink? Steve Ziliak emails: Dear Mark, When is anosmia – the permanent loss of smell – “significant”? [There is] a Supreme Court case – to be argued on January 10, 2011 – (more…)
By
Journal staff in
Blog alerts, Statistical Significance |
No Comments »
January 9th, 2011
“In supposedly one of the top ten cases of the Supreme Court this year … ” (excerpted from and continues at University of Michigan Press Blog, 28 Dec. 2010.
By
Journal staff in
Blog alerts, Statistical Significance |
No Comments »
January 17th, 2011
Justice Kagan refers to the arguments in Ziliak and McCloskey “The Cult of Statistical Significance” (without naming them). Listen to the argument ».
By
Journal staff in
Statistical Significance |
No Comments »
April 21st, 2011
“Making a Stat Less Significant,” Carl Bialik, Wall Street Journal, 2 Apr. 2011 “A Statistical Test Gets Its Closeup, Wall Street Journal, 1 Apr. 2011 Supreme Court Decision delivered by Justice Sotomayor, 22 March 2011 “‘Statistical Significance’ and the US Supreme Court: Ziliak-McCloskey, Statistical Literacy News, 2011. “Now their [McCloskey and Ziliak's] view is the (more…)
By
Journal staff in
Statistical Significance |
No Comments »