Daniel_Burfoot comments on Original Research on Less Wrong - Less Wrong

21 Post author: lukeprog 29 October 2012 10:50PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (47)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Daniel_Burfoot 30 October 2012 04:14:32PM 4 points [-]

It should only take <2.5 times as many subjects to detect a real effect at p < .001 instead of p < .05 and the proportion of false findings would go way down immediately.

But then people could only publish 1/50 as many papers!

Comment author: DaFranker 30 October 2012 05:13:15PM 2 points [-]

I had to do a double-take before I realized that this probably wasn't a serious attempt at a counterargument. I'm still not quite convinced that it isn't. Poe's Law and related things.

Yes, it does seem like some peoples' true rejections might turn out to be less opportunities for appeal to public and gaining popularity / funding.