Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In null-hypothesis significance testing, the p-value [note 1] is the probability of obtaining test results at least as extreme as the result actually observed, under the assumption that the null hypothesis is correct. [2] [3] A very small p-value means that such an extreme observed outcome would be very unlikely under the null hypothesis.
This means that the p-value is a statement about the relation of the data to that hypothesis. [2] The 0.05 significance level is merely a convention. [3] [5] The 0.05 significance level (alpha level) is often used as the boundary between a statistically significant and a statistically non-significant p-value. However, this does not imply that ...
To determine whether a result is statistically significant, a researcher calculates a p-value, which is the probability of observing an effect of the same magnitude or more extreme given that the null hypothesis is true. [5] [12] The null hypothesis is rejected if the p-value is less than (or equal to) a predetermined level, .
The p-value is the probability that a test statistic which is at least as extreme as the one obtained would occur under the null hypothesis. At a significance level of 0.05, a fair coin would be expected to (incorrectly) reject the null hypothesis (that it is fair) in 1 out of 20 tests on average.
The statistical significance of each B is tested by the Wald Chi-Square—testing the null that the B coefficient = 0 (the alternate hypothesis is that it does not = 0). p-values lower than alpha are significant, leading to rejection of the null. Here, only the independent variables felony, rehab, employment, are significant ( P-Value<0.05.
For a given significance level in a two-tailed test for a test statistic, the corresponding one-tailed tests for the same test statistic will be considered either twice as significant (half the p-value) if the data is in the direction specified by the test, or not significant at all (p-value above ) if the data is in the direction opposite of ...
[3] [4] The use of a P value cut-off point of 0.05 was introduced by R.A. Fisher; this led to study results being described as either statistically significant or non-significant. [5] Although this p-value objectified research outcome, using it as a rigid cut off point can have potentially serious consequences: (i) clinically important ...
Data dredging (also known as data snooping or p-hacking) [1] [a] is the misuse of data analysis to find patterns in data that can be presented as statistically significant, thus dramatically increasing and understating the risk of false positives.