Alphas, betas and skewy distributions: Two ways of getting the wrong answer

13Citations
Citations of this article
42Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Although many parametric statistical tests are considered to be robust, as recently shown in Methodologist's Corner, it still pays to be circumspect about the assumptions underlying statistical tests. In this paper I show that robustness mainly refers to α, the type-I error. If the underlying distribution of data is ignored there can be a major penalty in terms of the β, the type-II error, representing a large increase in false negative rate or, equivalently, a severe loss of power of the test. © 2011 The Author(s).

References Powered by Scopus

Likert scales, levels of measurement and the "laws" of statistics

2820Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

How to analyze Likert and other rating scale data

529Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Inflammatory markers in depression: A meta-analysis of mean differences and variability in 5,166 patients and 5,083 controls

506Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

A Meta-Analysis of Immune Parameters, Variability, and Assessment of Modal Distribution in Psychosis and Test of the Immune Subgroup Hypothesis

121Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Fayers, P. (2011). Alphas, betas and skewy distributions: Two ways of getting the wrong answer. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 16(3), 291–296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-011-9283-6

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 19

58%

Professor / Associate Prof. 7

21%

Researcher 5

15%

Lecturer / Post doc 2

6%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Psychology 8

35%

Medicine and Dentistry 7

30%

Computer Science 4

17%

Social Sciences 4

17%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free