Journal
BIOSCIENCE
Volume 57, Issue 1, Pages 65-70Publisher
AMER INST BIOLOGICAL SCI
DOI: 10.1641/B570110
Keywords
hypothesis test; equivalence test; statistical power; burden of proof; type I and type II error
Categories
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Hypothesis tests, which aim to minimize type I errors (false positive results), are standard procedures in scientific research, but they are often inappropriate in Endangered Species Act (ESA) reviews, where the primary objective is to prevent type II errors (false negative results). Recognizing this disparity is particularly important when the best data available are sparse and therefore lack statistical power because hypothesis tests that use data sets with low statistical power arc likely to commit type II errors, thereby denying necessary protection to threatened and endangered species. Equivalence tests can alleviate this problem, and ensure that imperiled species receive the benefit of the doubt, by switching the null and alternative hypotheses. These points are illustrated by critiquing a recent review of ESA requirements for endangered fishes in Upper Klamath Lake (southern Oregon).
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available