Empirical Direction in Design and Analysis

By Norman H. Anderson | Go to book overview
Save to active project


Every investigation with more than two conditions faces two linked hazards: escalation of false alarm and loss of power. Each comparison of two means is an opportunity for false alarm. Four conditions yield six two-mean comparisons—six opportunities for false alarms. Hence the effective α for this family of six comparisons is greater than the α used for each single test—not.05 but.20. This familywise α escalates rapidly with more conditions.

You can hold α down to whatever you want—at a price. The price is loss of power, that is, β increase. This is the α-β tradeoff dilemma of Chapter 2.

Two polarized philosophies have developed for dealing with this α–β trade–off dilemma. Each philosophy is mainly concerned with avoiding one of the two hazards. The familywise philosophy postulates that α should be set at some fixed value, regardless of the number of conditions. Necessarily, therefore, power decreases with more conditions. The per comparison philosophy, seeking to lessen such loss of power, allows larger α with more conditions.

The per comparison philosophy is advocated in this chapter for most work in experimental psychology. Current texts, in contrast, increasingly follow the familywise philosophy. But although some situations do require familywise analysis, these are not common in experimental psychology. The per comparison philosophy is founded on empirical common sense, as shown in the Parable of the Two Philosophies.

Extrastatistical considerations have an essential role with multiple comparisons. Among these are the guideline of planned comparisons and the principle of replication, which do much to provide reasonable control of α and β. This guideline and this principle are accepted by most empirical investigators.

Empirical judgment is the primary basis for handling multiple comparisons, not statistical techniques. Empirical judgment underlies the cost–benefit analysis necessary to deal with the α–β tradeoff dilemma. Above all, empirical judgment is needed in planning the design and analysis, especially in relation to the guideline of planned tests and the principle of replication. This chapter, accordingly, sets the issue of multiple comparisons within the framework of the Experimental Pyramid of Chapter 1.


Notes for this page

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Cite this page

Cited page

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited page

Bookmark this page
Empirical Direction in Design and Analysis
Table of contents

Table of contents



Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this book

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen
/ 864

matching results for page

Cited passage

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?