#p value

/ En este episodio nos resistimos a ser succionados por la fuerza mediática gravitacional del agujero negro, pero sólo porque estamos preparando algo especial para ustedes; a cambio, comentamos temas que tienen que ver con las fuerzas de masticación que nos permiten pronunciar ciertas vocales, las fuerzas políticas que impiden que las aves rapaces crucen fronteras, y las fuerzas comunitarias que abogan porque la ciencia no sea obra de un sólo estadístico. Recibimos la visita de Agustín Avila Casanueva, viejo amigo de Cienciacionales, que nos trae un mensaje de ciencia y paz entre las naciones.

Menú 00:20 - Inicios y promesas 05:17 - Las efes que nos trajo la agricultura 22:06 - Las políticas trasnacionales que restringen el paso de las aves... o que lo permiten 38:56 - Un mundo más allá de p <0.05 01:13:26 - Despedidas e invitaciones

Voces y contenido: Agustín Ávila, Sofía Flores, Rodrigo Pacheco y Víctor Hernández. Edición y producción: Víctor Hernández Voz en la rúbrica: Valeria Sánchez

Este podcast es producido desde un lugar donde las aves vuelan libremente, porque la frontera más cercana queda a mil kilómetros de distancia hacia el norte.

Fuentes Sobre el origen del uso de las labiodentales (el artículo original en inglés): science.sciencemag.org/content/363/6432/eaav3218 y una cobertura en español: invdes.com.mx/ciencia-ms/la-alim…ar-palabras-con-f/ Sobre los buitres que respetan fronteras: www.sciencedirect.com/science/articl…06320717315550 Y la nota del mismo Agustín sobre las lechuzas en la frontera Israel-Palestina: tengaparaqueseentretenga.wordpress.com/2017/…ente/ Sobre la crisis del valor de p (en inglés): www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-00857-9 y tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/…1305.2019.1583913 y este comentario en español sobre el tema: culturacientifica.com/2019/01/03/el-…de-la-ciencia/

Science is in the throes of a reproducibility crisis, and researchers, funders and publishers are increasingly worried that the scholarly literature is littered with unreliable results. Now, a group of 72 prominent researchers is targeting what they say is one cause of the problem: weak statistical standards of evidence for claiming new discoveries.

In many disciplines the significance of findings is judged by P values. They are used to test (and dismiss) a ‘null hypothesis’, which generally posits that the effect being tested for doesn’t exist. The smaller the P value that is found for a set of results, the less likely it is that the results are purely due to chance. Results are deemed 'statistically significant' when this value is below 0.05.

But many scientists worry that the 0.05 threshold has caused too many false positives to appear in the literature, a problem exacerbated by a practice called P hacking, in which researchers gather data without first creating a hypothesis to test, and then look for patterns in the results that can be reported as statistically significant.

So, in a provocative manuscript posted on the PsyArXiv preprint server on 22 July1, researchers argue that P-value thresholds should be lowered to 0.005 for the social and biomedical sciences. The final paper is set to be published in Nature Human Behavior.

Who can relate? LOL

Day #25 : The p-value – 365 DoA

It’s true!

Now it seems like we are getting somewhere. Last post we covered z-score and you can read that if you haven’t already, it might be good to familiarize yourself with it since today we are going to talk p-value and the difference between z-score and p-value. That said, let’s dive in and look at the value in the p-value.*

(more…)

Day #24 : The z-score – 365 DoA

So if you recall from last post… well I’m not linking to it. It was hellishly personal and frankly I’m still attempting to recover from it. We’re going to take it light this time and we can do a deep dive into something in another post. For that reason, let’s talk about z-score and what exactly it is, I mean we used it in this postand never defined it formally, so let’s do that. Let’s talk…