Rote application of frequentist testing does not necessarily tell you answers to the questions you’re actually interested in. A partial list of the reasons for this are:
Sampling variability is inadequate to describe genuine uncertainty
Rejecting a null is not necessarily what you care about
The standard statistics are built on untenable assumptions
None of our modeling assumptions plausibly capture how the data was collected.
This will take the form of a class discussion.
For each example, discuss the following questions. Try to connect the statistical concept to the question you’re interested in. In some cases you may argue that there is no useful interpretation.
How do you interepret the \(R^2\)?
How do you interpret the point estimate of the coefficients?
How do you interpret the confidence interval?
How do you interpret the “statistical significance” (as reported by R)?
Which set of modeling assumptions do you think are most reasonable?
Are these assumptions matched by the statistical analysis performed by lm?
In cases where statistical tools fall short, suggest ways you might adequately represent and report uncertainty.
Bodyfat example
We want to find easy-to-use measurements that act as a proxy for bodyfat during routine visits.
---title: "Statistical versus practical significance."format: html: code-fold: false code-tools: true---::: {.content-visible when-format="html"}{{< include /macros.tex >}}:::```{r}#| echo: false#| output: falselibrary(tidyverse)library(gridExtra)library(quarto)root_dir <- quarto::find_project_root()```Rote application of frequentist testing does not necessarilytell you answers to the questions you're actually interested in. Apartial list of the reasons for this are:- Sampling variability is inadequate to describe genuine uncertainty- Rejecting a null is not necessarily what you care about- The standard statistics are built on untenable assumptions- None of our modeling assumptions plausibly capture how the data was collected.This will take the form of a class discussion.For each example, discuss the following questions. Tryto connect the statistical concept to the question you'reinterested in. In some cases you may argue that there is nouseful interpretation.- How do you interepret the $R^2$?- How do you interpret the point estimate of the coefficients?- How do you interpret the confidence interval?- How do you interpret the "statistical significance" (as reported by `R`)?- Which set of modeling assumptions do you think are most reasonable?- Are these assumptions matched by the statistical analysis performed by `lm`?In cases where statistical tools fall short, suggest ways you mightadequately represent and report uncertainty.# Bodyfat exampleWe want to find easy-to-use measurements that act as a proxy forbodyfat during routine visits.```{r}bodyfat_df <-read.csv(file.path(root_dir, "datasets/bodyfat/bodyfat.csv"))ggplot(bodyfat_df) +geom_point(aes(x=Abdomen, y=bodyfat))bodyfat_reg <-lm(bodyfat ~1+ Abdomen + Weight + Age, bodyfat_df)summary(bodyfat_reg)```# Microcredit exampleWe would like to use a large randomized controlled trial to estimatethe causal effect of microcredit access on foot expenditures.```{r}load(file.path(root_dir, "datasets/microcredit/microcredit_mx_final_project_data.Rdata"))mx_df %>%filter(!is.na(treatment)) %>%ggplot() +geom_histogram(aes(x=foodspend, fill=factor(treatment), group=factor(treatment)), bins=100) +facet_grid(treatment ~ .)mc_reg <-lm(foodspend ~1+ treatment, mx_df)summary(mc_reg)```# KleiberWe are interested in fundamental laws governing the relationship betweenmetabolism and animal size.```{r}kleiber_df <-read.csv(file.path(root_dir, "datasets/kleiber/kleiber.csv"))lm_log_fit <-lm(log10(Metabol_kcal_per_day) ~1+log10(Weight_kg), kleiber_df)summary(lm_log_fit)ggplot(kleiber_df) +geom_point(aes(x=log10(Weight_kg), y=log10(Metabol_kcal_per_day),color=Animal, shape=Comparable), size=3)```