Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:

login

Log in to your personal account or through your institution.

If You Use a Screen Reader

This content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.

Betting After the Race is Over: The Perils of Post Hoc Hypothesizing

James L. Payne and James A. Dyer
American Journal of Political Science
Vol. 19, No. 3 (Aug., 1975), pp. 559-564
DOI: 10.2307/2110545
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2110545
Page Count: 6
  • Read Online (Free)
  • Subscribe ($19.50)
  • Cite this Item
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Betting After the Race is Over: The Perils of Post Hoc Hypothesizing
Preview not available

Abstract

Using a recent article by Sidney Ulmer as an example, this note offers two bits of advice to statistical researchers. One must take care to specify his hypotheses on an a priori basis. One must be cautious when the number of observations approaches the number of independent variables.

Page Thumbnails

  • Thumbnail: Page 
559
    559
  • Thumbnail: Page 
560
    560
  • Thumbnail: Page 
561
    561
  • Thumbnail: Page 
562
    562
  • Thumbnail: Page 
563
    563
  • Thumbnail: Page 
564
    564