> Ideally, Lakens says, the level of statistical significance needed to prove a hypothesis depends on how outlandish the hypothesis is.
> Yes, you’d want a very low p-value in a study that claims mental telepathy is possible. But do you need such stringent criteria for a well-worn idea? The high standards could impede young PhDs with low budgets.
Watching someone try to be Bayesian without using Bayesian techniques is painful.
> There are also new, advanced statistical techniques — like Bayesian analysis — that, in some ways, more directly evaluate a study’s outcome.
Almost as painful as watching Bayesian analysis described as "new."
> Yes, you’d want a very low p-value in a study that claims mental telepathy is possible. But do you need such stringent criteria for a well-worn idea? The high standards could impede young PhDs with low budgets.
Watching someone try to be Bayesian without using Bayesian techniques is painful.
> There are also new, advanced statistical techniques — like Bayesian analysis — that, in some ways, more directly evaluate a study’s outcome.
Almost as painful as watching Bayesian analysis described as "new."