MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135894553 · doi:10.7202/029931ar

L’interprétation des tests d’hypothèses : p, la taille de l’effet et la puissance

2009· article· fr· W2135894553 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Jimmy Bourque, Jean‐Guy Blais, François Larose

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue des sciences de l éducation · 2009
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMeta-analysis and systematic reviews
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeUniversité de MontréalUniversité de Moncton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article vise à expliciter la logique des tests d’hypothèses en recherche. Plusieurs études ont démontré une confusion quant à la signification des résultats de tests d’hypothèses. Cette confusion proviendrait en partie des points divergents entre les approches de Fisher, de Neyman et Pearson ainsi que de Bayes. L’article précise l’information fournie par le coefficient de signification, la taille de l’effet et la puissance et propose différents logiciels permettant l’analyse de la puissance et de la taille de l’effet.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.103
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.605
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1030.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.860
GPT teacher head0.606
Teacher spread0.254 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue des sciences de l éducationSame topicMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsFrench-language works237,207