IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envira/v41y2009i8p2029-2032.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reviews: The Cult of Statistical Significance: How the Standard Error Cost us Jobs, Justice and Live, the Power of Words in International Relations: Birth of an Anti-Whaling Discourse

Author

Listed:
  • Ron Johnston

    (School of Geographical Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 1SS, England)

  • Kolson Schlosser

    (Department of Geography and Geology, Western Kentucky University 1906 College Heights, Bowling Green, KY 42101, USA)

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Ron Johnston & Kolson Schlosser, 2009. "Reviews: The Cult of Statistical Significance: How the Standard Error Cost us Jobs, Justice and Live, the Power of Words in International Relations: Birth of an Anti-Whaling Discourse," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 41(8), pages 2029-2032, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:envira:v:41:y:2009:i:8:p:2029-2032
    DOI: 10.1068/a4108rvw
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1068/a4108rvw
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1068/a4108rvw?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ziliak, Stephen T. & McCloskey, Deirdre N., 2004. "Size matters: the standard error of regressions in the American Economic Review," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 527-546, November.
    2. Kevin Hoover & Mark Siegler, 2008. "Sound and fury: McCloskey and significance testing in economics," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(1), pages 1-37.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Peter J. Veazie, 2015. "Understanding Statistical Testing," SAGE Open, , vol. 5(1), pages 21582440145, January.
    2. Thomas Mayer, 2012. "Ziliak and McCloskey's Criticisms of Significance Tests: An Assessment," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 9(3), pages 256-297, September.
    3. Thomas Mayer, 2006. "The Empirical Significance of Econometric Models," Working Papers 620, University of California, Davis, Department of Economics.
    4. Stephen T. Ziliak & Deirdre N. McCloskey, 2013. "We Agree That Statistical Significance Proves Essentially Nothing: A Rejoinder to Thomas Mayer," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 10(1), pages 97-107, January.
    5. Thomas Mayer, 2012. "Ziliak and McClosky?s Criticisms of Significance Tests: A Damage Assessment," Working Papers 61, University of California, Davis, Department of Economics.
    6. Kim, Jae H. & Ji, Philip Inyeob, 2015. "Significance testing in empirical finance: A critical review and assessment," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 1-14.
    7. Thomas Mayer, 2012. "Ziliak and McClosky?s Criticisms of Significance Tests: A Damage Assessment," Working Papers 126, University of California, Davis, Department of Economics.
    8. Jason P Brown & Dayton M Lambert & Timothy R Wojan, 2019. "The Effect of the Conservation Reserve Program on Rural Economies: Deriving a Statistical Verdict from a Null Finding," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 101(2), pages 528-540.
    9. Meszaros, Sandor, 2008. "Theory testing (hypothesis testing) in agricultural economics," Studies in Agricultural Economics, Research Institute for Agricultural Economics, vol. 107, pages 1-13, March.
    10. Tom Engsted, 2009. "Statistical vs. Economic Significance in Economics and Econometrics: Further comments on McCloskey & Ziliak," CREATES Research Papers 2009-17, Department of Economics and Business Economics, Aarhus University.
    11. Rachel G. Childers, 2011. "Being One'S Own Boss: How Does Risk Fit In?," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 56(1), pages 48-58, May.
    12. Ricardo Barradas & Ines Tomas, 2023. "Household indebtedness in the European Union countries: Going beyond the mainstream interpretation," PSL Quarterly Review, Economia civile, vol. 76(304), pages 21-49.
    13. McShane, Michael K. & Cox, Larry A. & Butler, Richard J., 2010. "Regulatory competition and forbearance: Evidence from the life insurance industry," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 522-532, March.
    14. Armstrong, J. Scott & Green, Kesten C. & Graefe, Andreas, 2015. "Golden rule of forecasting: Be conservative," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(8), pages 1717-1731.
    15. Stanley, T.D. & Doucouliagos, Chris & Jarrell, Stephen B., 2008. "Meta-regression analysis as the socio-economics of economics research," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 276-292, February.
    16. Anupama Sen and Tooraj Jamasb, 2012. "Diversity in Unity: An Empirical Analysis of Electricity Deregulation in Indian States," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1).
    17. Evangelista, Rui & Ramalho, Esmeralda A. & Andrade e Silva, João, 2020. "On the use of hedonic regression models to measure the effect of energy efficiency on residential property transaction prices: Evidence for Portugal and selected data issues," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    18. Sefa Awaworyi Churchill & Mehmet Ugur & Siew Ling Yew, 2017. "Does Government Size Affect Per-Capita Income Growth? A Hierarchical Meta-Regression Analysis," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 93(300), pages 142-171, March.
    19. Ron Johnston, 2005. "Editorial," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 37(1), pages 2-8, January.
    20. Thomas R. Dyckman & Stephen A. Zeff, 2019. "Important Issues in Statistical Testing and Recommended Improvements in Accounting Research," Econometrics, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-11, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:envira:v:41:y:2009:i:8:p:2029-2032. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.