Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorCribbie, Robert
dc.date.accessioned2017-05-27T11:01:38Z
dc.date.available2017-05-27T11:01:38Z
dc.date.issued2017
dc.identifier.citationCribbie, R. A. (2017). Multiplicity control, school uniforms, and other perplexing debates. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 49(3), 159-165. doi: 10.1037/cbs0000075
dc.identifier.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1037/cbs0000075en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10315/33149
dc.description.abstractResearchers in psychology are frequently confronted with the issue of analyzing multiple relationships simultaneously. For example, this could involve multiple outcome variables or multiple predictors in a regression framework. Current recommendations typically steer researchers toward familywise or false discovery rate Type I error control in order to limit the probability of incorrectly rejecting the null hypothesis. Stepwise modified-Bonferroni procedures are suggested for following this recommendation. However, longstanding arguments against multiplicity control, combined with a modern distaste for null hypothesis significance testing, have warranted revisiting this debate. This paper explores both sides of the multiplicity control debate with the goal of educating concerned parties regarding best practices for conducting multiple related tests.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipSSHRC
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherAmerican Psychological Associationen_US
dc.subjectmultiplicity control, familywise error, Bonferroni, effect sizeen_US
dc.titleMultiplicity control, school uniforms, and other perplexing debates.
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.journalhttp://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/cbs/en_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


All items in the YorkSpace institutional repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved except where explicitly noted.