« The Black Swan, or This is more like what a blog entry is supposed to be | Main | Peer review »

March 26, 2007

The difference between "significant" and "not significant" is not itself statistically significant

Ben Jann writes,

I came across your paper on the difference between significant and non-significant results. My experience is that this misinterpretation is made in about every second talk I hear and also appears in a lot of published work.

Let me point you to an example in a prominent sociological journal. The references are:

Wu, Xiaogang and Yu Xie. 2003. "Does the Market Pay Off? Earnings Returns to Education in Urban China." American Sociological Review 68:425-42.

and the comment

Jann, Ben. 2005. "Earnings Returns to Education in Urban China: A Note on Testing Difference among Groups." American Sociological Review 70:860-864.

Posted by Andrew at March 26, 2007 12:49 AM

RSS feed for this entry.

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~cook/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/878

Comments

And here's another example:
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/abstract/329/7477/1259

Luckily, it's in the BMJ, which means that you can post a "rapid response" comment, which appears on the web page with the paper.

Posted by: Jeremy Miles at March 26, 2007 2:13 PM.

Post a comment




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)