Statistics: Statistical Significance and Null Hypothesis

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of statistical significance, specifically in relation to the interpretation of the 0.05 significance level and the null hypothesis. Participants are examining the accuracy of a student's explanation regarding statistical significance.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Some participants are questioning the validity of the student's explanation of statistical significance. Others are suggesting that a clearer definition of statistical significance may be necessary to address the misunderstanding.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants exploring different interpretations of the student's statement and the implications of statistical significance. There is an acknowledgment of a prior post in another forum, which may influence the current discussion.

Contextual Notes

There is a mention of cross-posting, which raises concerns about the appropriateness of the inquiry in multiple forums. This may affect the flow of responses and engagement in the current thread.

jlo2006
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Heres the problem:

When asked to explain the meaning of "statistically significant at the 0.05 level," a student says, "This means there is only probability 0.05 that the null hypothesis is true." Is this an essentially correct explanation of statistical significance? Explain.


Help please. Appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Can you perhaps mention some of your thoughts as to what the answer might be?

If you are finding it difficult to answer that, try to answer this: what is the definition of stat. significance?

Reading this might help.
 
Last edited:
He already posted the same question in the statistics forum.
 
How do you know it's a he? Jay-Lo? Hello?
 
Ahh... of course I assumed he meant his name to be pronounced with a soft j, like "halo," and all Halo aficionados are male.

No, I'm kidding, I didn't notice the name.
 
Regardless of gender, jlo2006 should not have cross-posted.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
7K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
3K