From ravi.varadhan at jhu.edu  Tue Feb 12 15:54:50 2013
From: ravi.varadhan at jhu.edu (Ravi Varadhan)
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 14:54:50 +0000
Subject: [Rd] Regression stars
In-Reply-To: <1360680169120-4658268.post@n4.nabble.com>
References: <1360243924659-4657795.post@n4.nabble.com>
	<20130209184801.GD14037@laura>
	<CAC+N9BXeaBzBMGidTJbrBT_hjKM0fW5ey6EWBSBbVqk12LZXGQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAC+N9BVRxcWLtGwHGbBD=4=uAPSan4jEFYfOWsLLqV4FrSyLGA@mail.gmail.com>
	<51180503.1080605@gmail.com> <loom.20130212T145313-215@post.gmane.org>
	<511A4F98.50209@statistik.tu-dortmund.de>
	<1360680169120-4658268.post@n4.nabble.com>
Message-ID: <2F9EA67EF9AE1C48A147CB41BE2E15C3365202@DOM-EB-MAIL2.win.ad.jhu.edu>

I think that we should use P < .03 (which approximates the probability of 5 consecutive heads) for assigning significance!

Ravi

-----Original Message-----
From: r-devel-bounces at r-project.org [mailto:r-devel-bounces at r-project.org] On Behalf Of Frank Harrell
Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 9:43 AM
To: r-devel at r-project.org
Subject: Re: [Rd] Regression stars

Uwe I've been consulting for decades and have never once been asked for such stars.  And when a clinical researcher puts a sentence in a study protocol that P<0.05 will be considered "significant" I get them to take it out.
Frank

Uwe Ligges-3 wrote
> On 12.02.2013 14:54, Ben Bolker wrote:
>> Duncan Murdoch
> <murdoch.duncan <at>
>  gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>    [snip]
>>>
>>> Regarding stringsAsFactors:  I'm not going to defend keeping it as 
>>> is, I'll let the people who like it defend it.
>>
>>    Would someone (anyone) like to come forward and give us a defense 
>> of stringsAsFactors=TRUE -- even someone who doesn't personally like 
>> it but would like to play devil's advocate?
> 
> Sure:
> I will have to change all my scripts, my teaching examples, my book, 
> and lots of code examples for research and particularly consulting jobs.
> 
> Personally, I think having stringsAsFactors=TRUE is not too bad for
> read.table() but less useful for data.frame().
> 
> And since you ask for the devil's advocate already, related to the 
> subject line: Removing stars is horrible for consulting: With all 
> those people from biology, medicine and other fields who even ask us 
> questions in term of significance stars that are obviously very common for them.
> Many of them will certainly ask us for the stars, and ask us to switch 
> to another software product once they do not get it from R. They may 
> not be interested in being taught about the advantages or 
> disadvantages of p-values or stars.
> 
> There are different use cases of R, and I want to keep stars for 
> consulting tasks where things have to be delivered within minutes. I 
> am happy with or without for teaching, where I have the time and can 
> easily talk about the sense and nonsense of p-values.
> 
> 
> Best,
> Uwe
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>>
>>> What I will likely do is
>>> make a few changes so that character vectors are automatically 
>>> changed to factors in modelling functions, so that operating with 
>>> stringsAsFactors=FALSE doesn't trigger silly warnings.
>>>
>>> Duncan Murdoch
>>>
>>
>>   [apologies for snipping context: "gmane made me do it"]
>>
>> ______________________________________________
>> 

> R-devel@

>  mailing list
>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>>
> 
> ______________________________________________

> R-devel@

>  mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel





-----
Frank Harrell
Department of Biostatistics, Vanderbilt University
--
View this message in context: http://r.789695.n4.nabble.com/Regression-stars-tp4657795p4658268.html
Sent from the R devel mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

______________________________________________
R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel



[Rd] Regression stars
Ravi Varadhan