Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Everything Wrong with P-Values Under One Roof

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Beyond Traditional Probabilistic Methods in Economics (ECONVN 2019)

Part of the book series: Studies in Computational Intelligence ((SCI,volume 809))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

P-values should not be used. They have no justification under frequentist theory; they are pure acts of will. Arguments justifying p-values are fallacious. P-values are not used to make all decisions about a model, where in some cases judgment overrules p-values. There is no justification for this in frequentist theory. Hypothesis testing cannot identify cause. Models based on p-values are almost never verified against reality. P-values are never unique. They cause models to appear more real than reality. They lead to magical or ritualized thinking. They do not allow the proper use of decision making. And when p-values seem to work, they do so because they serve a loose proxies for predictive probabilities, which are proposed as the replacement for p-values.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 259.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Neyman, J.: Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A 236, 333 (1937)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Lehman, E.: Jerzy Neyman, 1894–1981. Technical report, Department of Statistics, Berkeley (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Trafimow, D., Amrhein, V., Areshenkoff, C.N., Barrera-Causil, C.J., Beh, E.J., Bilgiç, Y.K., Bono, R., Bradley, M.T., Briggs, W.M., Cepeda-Freyre, H.A., Chaigneau, S.E., Ciocca, D.R., Correa, J.C., Cousineau, D., de Boer, M.R., Dhar, S.S., Dolgov, I., Gómez-Benito, J., Grendar, M., Grice, J.W., Guerrero-Gimenez, M.E., Gutiérrez, A., Huedo-Medina, T.B., Jaffe, K., Janyan, A., Karimnezhad, A., Korner-Nievergelt, F., Kosugi, K., Lachmair, M., Ledesma, R.D., Limongi, R., Liuzza, M.T., Lombardo, R., Marks, M.J., Meinlschmidt, G., Nalborczyk, L., Nguyen, H.T., Ospina, R., Perezgonzalez, J.D., Pfister, R., Rahona, J.J., Rodríguez-Medina, D.A., Romão, X., Ruiz-Fernández, S., Suarez, I., Tegethoff, M., Tejo, M., van de Schoot, R., Vankov, I.I., Velasco-Forero, S., Wang, T., Yamada, Y., Zoppino, F.C.M., Marmolejo-Ramos, F.: Front. Psychol. 9, 699 (2018). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00699

  4. Ziliak, S.T., McCloskey, D.N.: The Cult of Statistical Significance. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor (2008)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Greenland, S.: Am. J. Epidemiol. 186, 639 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. McShane, B.B., Gal, D., Gelman, A., Robert, C., Tackett, J.L.: The American Statistician (2018, forthcoming)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Berger, J.O., Selke, T.: JASA 33, 112 (1987)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Gigerenzer, G.: J. Socio-Econ. 33, 587 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Cohen, J.: Am. Psychol. 49, 997 (1994)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Trafimow, D.: Philos. Psychol. 30(4), 411 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Nguyen, H.T.: Integrated Uncertainty in Knowledge Modelling and Decision Making, pp. 3–15. Springer (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Trafimow, D., Marks, M.: Basic Appl. Soc. Psychol. 37(1), 1 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Nosek, B.A., Alter, G., Banks, G.C., et al.: Science 349, 1422 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Ioannidis, J.P.: PLoS Med. 2(8), e124 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Nuzzo, R.: Nature 526, 182 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Colquhoun, D.: R. Soc. Open Sci. 1, 1 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Greenland, S., Senn, S.J., Rothman, K.J., Carlin, J.B., Poole, C., Goodman, S.N., Altman, D.G.: Eur. J. Epidemiol. 31(4), 337 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-016-0149-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Greenwald, A.G.: Psychol. Bull. 82(1), 1 (1975)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  19. Hochhaus, R.G.A., Zhang, M.: Leukemia 30, 1965 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Harrell, F.: A litany of problems with p-values (2018). http://www.fharrell.com/post/pval-litany/

  21. Benjamin, D., Berger, J., Johannesson, M., Nosek, B., Wagenmakers, E., Berk, R., et al.: Nat. Hum. Behav. 2, 6 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Mulder, J., Wagenmakers, E.J.: J. Math. Psychol. 72, 1 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Hitchcock, C.: The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2016 Edition) (2016). https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/causation--probabilistic

  24. Breiman, L.: Stat. Sci. 16(3), 199 (2001)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  25. Pearl, J.: Causality: Models, Reasoning, and Inference. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2000)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  26. Briggs, W.M.: Uncertainty: The Soul of Probability, Modeling & Statistics. Springer, New York (2016)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  27. Nuzzo, R.: Nature 506, 50 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Begley, C.G., Ioannidis, J.P.: Circ. Res. 116, 116 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Franklin, J.: Erkenntnis 55, 277 (2001)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  30. Jaynes, E.T.: Probability Theory: The Logic of Science. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2003)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  31. Keynes, J.M.: A Treatise on Probability. Dover Phoenix Editions, Mineola (2004)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. Briggs, W.M., Nguyen, H.T., Trafimow, D.: Structural Changes and Their Econometric Modeling. Springer (2019, forthcoming)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Fisher, R.: Statistical Methods for Research Workers, 14th edn. Oliver and Boyd, Edinburgh (1970)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  34. Briggs, W.M.: arxiv.org/pdf/math.GM/0610859 (2006)

  35. Stove, D.: Popper and After: Four Modern Irrationalists. Pergamon Press, Oxford (1982)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Holmes, S.: Bull. Am. Math. Soc. 55, 31 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Briggs, W.M.: arxiv.org/abs/1507.07244 (2015)

  38. Protano, C., Vitali, M.: Environ. Health Perspect. 119, a422 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Briggs, W.M.: JASA 112, 897 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Gneiting, T., Raftery, A.E., Balabdaoui, F.: J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. B Stat. Methodol. 69, 243 (2007)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  41. Gneiting, T., Raftery, A.E.: JASA 102, 359 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Winstein, K.J.: Wall Str. J. (2008). https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB121867148093738861

  43. Vigen, T.: Spurious correlations (2018). http://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations

  44. Jeffreys, H.: Theory of Probability. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1998)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  45. Goodman, S.N.: Epidemiology 12, 295 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Nguyen, H.T., Sriboonchitta, S., Thac, N.N.: Structural Changes and Their Econometric Modeling. Springer (2019, forthcoming)

    Google Scholar 

  47. Hájek, A.: Erkenntnis 45, 209 (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  48. Hájek, A.: Uncertainty: Multi-disciplinary Perspectives on Risk. Earthscan (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  49. Hájek, A.: Erkenntnis 70, 211 (2009)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  50. Biau, D.J., Jolles, B.M., Porcher, R.: Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 468(3), 885 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Sainani, K.L.: Phys. Med. Rehabil. 4, 442 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  52. Briggs, W.M.: So, You Think You’re Psychic? Lulu, New York (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  53. Campbell, S., Franklin, J.: Synthese 138, 79 (2004)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  54. Stove, D.: The Rationality of Induction. Clarendon, Oxford (1986)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 340 E. 64th Apt 9A, New York, USA

    William M. Briggs

Authors
  1. William M. Briggs
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to William M. Briggs .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science, University of Texas at El Paso, El Paso, TX, USA

    Vladik Kreinovich

  2. Banking University HCMC, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

    Nguyen Ngoc Thach

  3. Banking University HCMC, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

    Nguyen Duc Trung

  4. TTC Group, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

    Dang Van Thanh

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Briggs, W.M. (2019). Everything Wrong with P-Values Under One Roof. In: Kreinovich, V., Thach, N., Trung, N., Van Thanh, D. (eds) Beyond Traditional Probabilistic Methods in Economics. ECONVN 2019. Studies in Computational Intelligence, vol 809. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-04200-4_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation