Infoviz, "a statistically significant 226% improvement," and an obsessive take on the "bat and ball" problem
What to read this week.
Here’s what you can look forward to this week on the blog:
Mon 15 Apr 2024: No, it’s not “statistically implausible” when results differ between studies, or between different groups within a study.
Tues 16 Apr: N=43, “a statistically significant 226% improvement,” . . . what could possibly go wrong??
Wed 17 Apr: Do research articles have to be so one-sided?
Thurs 18 Apr: Infovis, infographics, and data visualization: My thoughts 12 years later
Fri 19 Apr: The data are on a 1-5 scale, the mean is 4.61, and the standard deviation is 1.64 . . . What’s so wrong about that??
Sat 20 Apr: Analogy between (a) model checking in Bayesian statistics, and (b) the self-correcting nature of science
Sun 21 Apr: Now here’s a tour de force for ya
And here’s what came up this past week:
14 Apr: Simulation to understand two kinds of measurement error in regression
13 Apr: Intelligence is whatever machines cannot (yet) do
13 Apr: Evidence, desire, support
12 Apr: Delayed retraction sampling
8 Apr: Hey, some good news for a change! (Child psychology and Bayes)
Enjoy.