Post #2292061
2025-03-25 20:04 UTC
@auzdavenice@mastodon.social Agree to report both (and to report absolute p-values). But I'm not sure if you could justify giving more weight to test B if there is nothing a priori to indicate that it is a "better" test...
I'm curious to see how people would interpret such a situation in terms of reaching significance cut-off, and supporting hypothesis or not.
Replies (1)
-
@auzdavenice@mastodon.social 2025-03-25 20:34
@satrevik@fediscience.org fair about B not really being a stronger test per se - I think the longer I'm a program officer the more I'm doubling down on the need for sensitivity analysis / real hesitant about putting much weight on any single NHST, pre-specofors or not. Hence "I think B is a bit stronger of a signal for [reasons], but it wasn't an a priori called shot and A limits the strength of certainty for [other reasons]" is how i'd deal with it