Příspěvek upozorňuje na metodologický přístup autorů k vlastnímu výzkumu. V sedmi vybraných českých časopisech (6 recenzovaných za obor kinantropologie a jeden s IF /impakt faktorem/ za obor psychologie) byla posuzována správnost postupu zjišťování statistické významnosti pomocí testování nulové hypotézy. Výsledky ukazují na závažný nedostatek při užití tohoto statistického nástroje – randomizace výzkumného souboru. Je zřejmá i chybná interpretace pojmů „hladina statistické významnosti“ a „chyba I. druhu“, což lze přičíst nejasné koncepci celého postupu testování statistické významnosti. U převážné většiny studií, které užívají tento statistický nástroj, jsou vyslovené závěry opřeny o chybnou metodiku a jejich průkaznost je tedy nízká. Autoři zdůrazňují přístup redakcí odborných časopisů ke kvalitě příspěvků (požadavky na metodickou a diskusní část, posun kritérií recenzní činnosti na světovou úroveň). and Problems of research sample and testing the null hypothesis
The paper points to the methodological approach of authors to the research. In seven selected Czech journals (6 peer-reviewed kinanthropological ones and one psychological journal with an impact factor), the statistical testing of null hypothesis was assessed. The results show a serious defect in fulfillment the condition for the use of this statistical instrument – the randomization of the sample. The incorrect interpretation of concepts „level of statistical significance“ and „type one error“ is evident being the result of unclear conception of statistical significance testing. In many studies using this statistical instrument the results are based on wrong methodology and their conclusiveness is thus low. The authors emphasize the approach of editorial boards of scientific journals to the quality of manuscripts: requirements concerning the „method“ and „discussion“ parts, and shifting review criteria to the worldwide accepted level.
The article explains the various errors that occur in the use of the concept of statistical significance. It points to the problem of census, nonprobability sampling, sampling of small populations and small samples. Another topic is the use of statistical methods on aggregated data files, especially from international research, and on weighted data. The authors point out that in many cases the use of statistical significance is not appropriate, and they warn against the incorrect use of traditional statistical methods. The article also presents methods that can be used to avoid the problems to which the authors have drawn attention.
The use of significance tests in social sciences is widespread mainly due to simple computation via statistical packages. Unfortunately the more social scientists use statistical significance estimates for making causal inferences the less they appear to understand about this influential concept. Statistical modelling results are usually presented in terms of their statistical significance and little other information is provided. The goal of this article is to show the limits of using statistical significance as a sole means of making inferences; and to present alternative statistical fit indicators readily available within frequentist approach to statistics: confidence intervals, minimum sample size and power analysis. Multiple working hypotheses are also explored together with two well known information criteria – AIC and BIC. This article provides practical information on how to undertake valid and reliable statistical analyses of social science data.
The use of significance tests in social sciences is widespread mainly due to simple computation via statistical packages. Unfortunately the more social scientists use statistical significance estimates for making causal inferences the less they appear to understand about this influential concept. Statistical modelling results are usually presented in terms of their statistical significance and little other information is provided. The goal of this article is to show the limits of using statistical significance as a sole means of making inferences; and to present alternative statistical fit indicators readily available within frequentist approach to statistics: confidence intervals, minimum sample size and power analysis. Multiple working hypotheses are also explored together with two well known information criteria - AIC and BIC. This article provides practical information on how to undertake valid and reliable statistical analyses of social science data., Petr Soukup., and Obsahuje bibliografii a bibliografické odkazy
The aim of the article is to quantify how often in leading Czech social-science journals (Československá psychologie / Czechoslovak Psychology, Pedagogika/Pedagogy, and Sociologický časopis / Czech Sociological Review) authors choose the wrong procedures to analyse quantitative data. In particular, attention is focused on the incorrect choice of statistical tests, their misinterpretation and mechanical application, and the use of effect sizes, that are so highly recommended nowadays. The basic research period was ten years, from 2005 to 2014, and for the Czech Sociological Review the period was extended back to 1995. The results of the content analysis of published articles (N=363) show that statistical tests are applied quite often to data that are not suitable for statistical tests: this is found in about one-fifth of cases in Czech Sociological Review, one-half in Pedagogy, and more than three-quarters in Czechoslovak Psychology. In addition, authors often make mechanical use of statistical methods or make incorrect interpretations (in over 40% of articles in the Czech Sociological Review over the last 10 years) and there are rarely any substantive interpretations of results (especially in Czechoslovak Psychology). Effect sizes are applied relatively often, but there are also gaps in their usage. It is clear from the results that changes are necessary both in the teaching of quantitative methodology and publishing practices in this subject area.
This article presents a critical evaluation of the growing popularity of online social surveys for the exploration of attitudes and behaviours within higher educational institutions. More specifically this article addresses a number of key issues: the construction of representative online samples, and the presentation of the results from an institutional census constructed from an online survey with a low response rate. The improper use of statistical significance tests, and the reporting of systematic errors when quota sampling is employed in surveys is also discussed. This study compares and evaluates four recent academic surveys: (a) the Czech wave of the EUROSTUDENT IV survey fielded by SC&C, (b) A Research Survey on Academic Staff at Czech Colleges and Universities undertaken by SC&C in 2009, (c) surveys of students and (d) employees at Palacky University Olomouc undertaken by the newly established Laboratory of Social Research. This article shows that an improper interpretation of online surveys resulted in a missrepresention of the views of university students and academic staff on the state of Czech higher education and opinions concerning different tertiary education reform measures., Dan Ryšavý., and Obsahuje bibliografii a bibliografické odkazy
This article presents a critical evaluation of the growing popularity of online social surveys for the exploration of attitudes and behaviours within higher educational institutions. More specifically this article addresses a number of key issues: the construction of representative online samples, and the presentation of the results from an institutional census constructed from an online survey with a low response rate. The improper use of statistical significance tests, and the reporting of systematic errors when quota sampling is employed in surveys is also discussed. This study compares and evaluates four recent academic surveys: (a) the Czech wave of the EUROSTUDENT IV survey fielded by SC&C, (b) A Research Survey on Academic Staff at Czech Colleges and Universities undertaken by SC&C in 2009, (c) surveys of students and (d) employees at Palacky University Olomouc undertaken by the newly established Laboratory of Social Research. This article shows that an improper interpretation of online surveys resulted in a missrepresention of the views of university students and academic staff on the state of Czech higher education and opinions concerning different tertiary education reform measures.