Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Physical Sciences and Mathematics Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Physical Sciences and Mathematics
The Not-So-Quiet Revolution: Cautionary Comments On The Rejection Of Hypothesis Testing In Favor Of A “Causal” Modeling Alternative, Daniel H. Robinson, Joel R. Levin
The Not-So-Quiet Revolution: Cautionary Comments On The Rejection Of Hypothesis Testing In Favor Of A “Causal” Modeling Alternative, Daniel H. Robinson, Joel R. Levin
Journal of Modern Applied Statistical Methods
Rodgers (2010) recently applauded a revolution involving the increased use of statistical modeling techniques. It is argued that such use may have a downside, citing empirical evidence in educational psychology that modeling techniques are often applied in cross-sectional, correlational studies to produce unjustified causal conclusions and prescriptive statements.
Statistical And Mathematical Modeling Versus Nhst? There’S No Competition!, Joseph Lee Rodgers
Statistical And Mathematical Modeling Versus Nhst? There’S No Competition!, Joseph Lee Rodgers
Journal of Modern Applied Statistical Methods
Some of Robinson & Levin’s critique of Rodgers (2010) is cogent, helpful, and insightful – although limiting. Recent methodology has advanced through the development of structural equation modeling, multi-level modeling, missing data methods, hierarchical linear modeling, categorical data analysis, as well as the development of many dedicated and specific behavioral models. These methodological approaches are based on a revised epistemological system, and have emerged naturally, without the need for task forces, or even much self-conscious discussion. The original goal was neither to develop nor promote a modeling revolution. That has occurred; I documented its development and its status. Two organizing …