Interpreting statistical testing: Process and propensity, not population and random sampling

31Citations
Citations of this article
24Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

The standard textbook treatment of conventional statistical tests assumes random sampling from a population and interprets the outcome of the statistical testing as being about a population. Problems with this interpretation include that (1) experimenters rarely make any attempt to randomly sample, (2) if random sampling occurred, conventional statistical tests would not precisely describe the population, and (3) experimenters do not use statistical testing to generalize to a population. The assumption of random sampling can be replaced with the assumption that scores were produced by a process. Rejecting the null hypothesis then leads to a conclusion about process, applying to only the subjects in the experiment (e.g., that some difference in the treatment of two groups caused the difference in average scores). This interpretation avoids the problems noted and fits how statistical testing is used in psychology. Copyright 1998 Psychonomic Society, Inc.

References Powered by Scopus

The probable error of a mean

0
2462Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

In defense of external invalidity

968Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Statistical Intervals: A Guide for Practitioners

610Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Statistical methods for communication science

291Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

The effects of past hurricane experiences on evacuation intentions through risk perception and efficacy beliefs: A mediation analysis

161Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Data analysis as the search for signals in noisy processes

138Citations
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

Frick, R. W. (1998). Interpreting statistical testing: Process and propensity, not population and random sampling. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 30(3), 527–535. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03200686

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 10

56%

Researcher 5

28%

Lecturer / Post doc 2

11%

Professor / Associate Prof. 1

6%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Social Sciences 8

50%

Psychology 4

25%

Medicine and Dentistry 3

19%

Philosophy 1

6%

Article Metrics

Tooltip
Social Media
Shares, Likes & Comments: 11

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free