Can a statistically significant test be interpreted regardless of the sample size used in a particular study? In this brief commentary on Benassi et al. (2013), we seek to answer this question using the same case study and method (i.e., False Positive Report Probability) proposed by the authors. We will demonstrate that, differently from Benassi et al., the interpretation of statistical significance is strongly related to sample size. The results are discussed with a special emphasis on their applied relevance.
The effect of sample size on the meaning of a statistically significant result
ALTOE', GIANMARCO;PASTORE, MASSIMILIANO
2013
Abstract
Can a statistically significant test be interpreted regardless of the sample size used in a particular study? In this brief commentary on Benassi et al. (2013), we seek to answer this question using the same case study and method (i.e., False Positive Report Probability) proposed by the authors. We will demonstrate that, differently from Benassi et al., the interpretation of statistical significance is strongly related to sample size. The results are discussed with a special emphasis on their applied relevance.File in questo prodotto:
File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
Altoe&Pastore_2013gip.pdf
non disponibili
Tipologia:
Published (publisher's version)
Licenza:
Accesso privato - non pubblico
Dimensione
643.67 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
643.67 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri Richiedi una copia |
Pubblicazioni consigliate
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.