EconStor >
University of California (UC) >
UC Davis, Department of Economics >
Working Papers, Department of Economics, UC Davis >

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10419/58359
  
Title:Ziliak and McClosky's criticisms of significance tests: A damage assessment PDF Logo
Authors:Mayer, Thomas
Issue Date:2012
Series/Report no.:Working Papers, University of California, Department of Economics 12,6
Abstract:D. N. McCloskey and Stephen Ziliak have criticized economists and others for confounding statistical and substantive significance, and for committing the logical error of the transposed conditional. In doing so they sometimes misinterpret the function of significance tests. Nonetheless, economists sometimes make both of these errors - but not nearly as often as Ziliak and McCloskey claim. They also argue - incorrectly - that the existence of an effect, which is what significance tests are about, is not a scientific question. Their complaint that in testing significance economists often do not take the loss function into account is unfounded. But they are right in arguing that confidence intervals should be presented more frequently.
Subjects:significance tests
t's
confidence intervals
Zilliak
McCloskey
oomph
JEL:C12
B4
Document Type:Working Paper
Appears in Collections:Working Papers, Department of Economics, UC Davis

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat
717283712.pdf479.58 kBAdobe PDF
No. of Downloads: Counter Stats
Download bibliographical data as: BibTeX
Share on:http://hdl.handle.net/10419/58359

Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.