4.7 Article

THE STIPPLING SHOWS STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT GRID POINTS How Research Results are Routinely Overstated and Overinterpreted, and What to Do about It

Journal

BULLETIN OF THE AMERICAN METEOROLOGICAL SOCIETY
Volume 97, Issue 12, Pages 2263-+

Publisher

AMER METEOROLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1175/BAMS-D-15-00267.1

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation [AGS-1112200]
  2. Div Atmospheric & Geospace Sciences
  3. Directorate For Geosciences [1112200] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Special care must be exercised in the interpretation of multiple statistical hypothesis tests for example, when each of many tests corresponds to a different location. Correctly interpreting results of multiple simultaneous tests requires a higher standard of evidence than is the case when evaluating results of a single test, and this has been known in the atmospheric sciences literature for more than a century. Even so, the issue continues to be widely ignored, leading routinely to overstatement and overinterpretation of scientific results, to the detriment of the discipline. This paper reviews the history of the multiple-testing issue within the atmospheric sciences literature and illustrates a statistically principled and computationally easy approach to dealing with it namely, control of the false discovery rate.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available