Munchen: I have to disagree with what you are saying about the statistical analysis of psychological studies, or any scientific studies for that matter. The first thing I disagree with is your "cutoff." Can you point me to a scientist that will be quoted as saying that "things can be explained 100% or that they need to be explained to this degree to be "sound enough to be applied in the real world." I can honestly say that I have never seen an experiment that used an alpha of .0000000000.......
I guess my second disagreement is similar to the first one in that I do not believe that the ultimate goal of science is to understand 100% of the world completely because the basis of science is that we will forever be asking questions. It appears to me that your argument is based on your idea that science needs 100% reliability and validity to be of any use and I would like to see you support that hypothesis by giving us some examples of research that was held to those standards.
Last edited by zfleebin; 01-03-2005 at 07:26 PM..
|