We were forced not to think in probabilities during my econometrics education if... | Hacker News

Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit

		bartkappenburg on Feb 26, 2015 \| parent \| context \| favorite \| on: Psychology Journal Bans Significance Testing We were forced not to think in probabilities during my econometrics education if we talked about confidence intervals. Say you have a confidence interval of 95% or higher (p value <= 5%), then the right thing to say is: 95% of the variance within the data is explained by the model (you've come up with).

Paradigma11 on Feb 26, 2015 [–]

In my opinion the most useful answer would be, for example a mean: The mean is within this interval. We used a model that has this properties, 95% of the...

I think it is ridiculous that the main focus always seems to be arcane properties of the statistical algorithm and not the answer that it delivers.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact