Abstract
Many common misinterpretations of Null Hypothesis Significance Testing (NHST) are related to the inverse probability fallacy. The inverse probability fallacy is the mistaken belief that the probability of the data given the null hypothesis, P(D|H0), is equivalent to the probability of the null hypothesis given the data, P(H0|D). We contrasted the effectiveness of two teaching interventions aimed at reducing this fallacy: Instruction in Bayes’ theorem (group B) and instruction in the formal logic of NHST (Modus Tollens, group MT). Both interventions were remarkably effective in reducing fallacy. At pre-test, 82% of students agreed with at least one statement of the inverse probability fallacy. At post-B-intervention this figure was 49% and at post-MT, it was 48%. A smaller, but still substantial, effect remained in both groups at a five-week follow-up. This suggests that the essential ingredient in overcoming the inverse probability fallacy is simply to expose the null ritual as problematic.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
