Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
In a significance test, the null hypothesis is rejected if the p-value is less than or equal to a predefined threshold value , which is referred to as the alpha level or significance level. α {\displaystyle \alpha } is not derived from the data, but rather is set by the researcher before examining the data.
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, .
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 ...
The solution to this question would be to report the p-value or significance level α of the statistic. For example, if the p-value of a test statistic result is estimated at 0.0596, then there is a probability of 5.96% that we falsely reject H 0. Or, if we say, the statistic is performed at level α, like 0.05, then we allow to falsely reject ...
The Bonferroni correction can also be applied as a p-value adjustment: Using that approach, instead of adjusting the alpha level, each p-value is multiplied by the number of tests (with adjusted p-values that exceed 1 then being reduced to 1), and the alpha level is left unchanged.
If is the largest p-value smaller than 5% which can actually occur for some table, then the proposed test effectively tests at the -level. For small sample sizes, α e {\displaystyle \alpha _{e}} might be significantly lower than 5%.
For example, if a stock fund returned 12 percent and the S&P 500 returned 10 percent, the alpha would be 2 percent. But alpha should really be used to measure return in excess of what would be ...
This has been extended to show that all post-hoc power analyses suffer from what is called the "power approach paradox" (PAP), in which a study with a null result is thought to show more evidence that the null hypothesis is actually true when the p-value is smaller, since the apparent power to detect an actual effect would be higher. [11]