Organization and Management Theory OMT

  • 1.  AOM 2008 PDW - Alternatives to Null Hypothesis Significance Testing

    Posted 05-07-2008 13:29
    Professional Development Workshop (sponsored by the RM and OB Divisions)

    The Case Against Null Hypothesis Significance Testing: Flaws, Alternatives,
    and Action Plans

    Academy of Management Meeting in Anaheim, CA
    Saturday, Aug 9 2007 4:00 – 6:00 PM
    Hilton Anaheim in Capistrano B

    Organizers:
    William H. Starbuck; University of Oregon
    Andreas Schwab; Iowa State University/Louisiana State University
    Ingo Holzinger; York University

    Presenters:
    William H. Starbuck; University of Oregon
    Eric Abrahamson; Columbia University
    Bruce Thompson; Texas A&M University

    The purpose of this workshop is to increase awareness among management
    researchers of the severe limitations of Null Hypothesis Significance
    Testing (NHST) and to introduce alternative approaches based on effect size
    measures and confidence intervals.

    NHST has been criticized by methodologists on various grounds (Cohen, 1994;
    Cortina & Folger, 1998; Schmidt, 1996; Starbuck, 2006; Thompson, 1996).
    Their criticism suggests that the extensive use of NHST in quantitative
    management research has led to the accumulation of deceptive findings in
    the management literature. In a field that aspires to provide useful
    advice to managers, researchers need to focus on practically important
    effects that are robust across a wide variety of settings. To identify
    practically meaningful findings, methodologists have recommended the
    reporting of effect sizes and confidence intervals as an alternative to
    NHST. Recently, approaches for estimating confidence intervals for effect
    size measures have also been introduced (Cummings & Finch, 2001; Kline,
    2004). The application of alternatives to NHST by management researchers,
    however, has been limited by both a lack of sensitivity regarding the
    inherent problems of NHST and a limited familiarity with alternative
    approaches. Our two-hour workshop addresses these issues in the following
    three modules:

    • Critique of NHST (2 speakers)
    • Alternatives to NHST (1 speakers)
    • Round-table discussion for hands-on advice

    No pre-registration is required to attend this session.

    For further information on this session, please contact Andreas Schwab
    (aschwa3@lsu.edu) or Ingo Holzinger (iholzinger@schulich.yorku.ca).

    ________________________________________________________________________

    DISCLAIMER: This email and any files transmitted with it are private and
    confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity
    to whom they are addressed. If you are not the addressee, you are not
    authorised to copy or use the information or to place any reliance upon
    it, nor should you copy it or show it to anyone. If you have received
    this email in error please notify postmaster@schulich.yorku.ca

    This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Symantec Mail Security.


  • 2.  AOM 2008 PDW - Alternatives to Null Hypothesis Significance Testing

    Posted 08-04-2008 15:47

    Professional Development Workshop (sponsored by the RM and OB Divisions)

    The Case Against Null Hypothesis Significance Testing: Flaws, Alternatives, and Action Plans

    Academy of Management Meeting in Anaheim, CA
    Saturday, Aug 9 2007 4:00 – 6:00 PM
    Hilton Anaheim in Capistrano B

    Organizers:
    William H. Starbuck; University of Oregon
    Andreas Schwab; Iowa State University/Louisiana State University
    Ingo Holzinger; York University

    Presenters:
    William H. Starbuck; University of Oregon
    Eric Abrahamson; Columbia University
    Bruce Thompson; Texas A&M University

    The purpose of this workshop is to increase awareness among management researchers of the severe limitations of Null Hypothesis Significance Testing (NHST) and to introduce alternative approaches based on effect size measures and confidence intervals.  

    NHST has been criticized by methodologists on various grounds (Cohen, 1994; Cortina & Folger, 1998; Schmidt, 1996; Starbuck, 2006; Thompson, 1996).  Their criticism suggests that the extensive use of NHST in quantitative management research has led to the accumulation of deceptive findings in the management literature.  In a field that aspires to provide useful advice to managers, researchers need to focus on practically important effects that are robust across a wide variety of settings.  To identify practically meaningful findings, methodologists have recommended the reporting of effect sizes and confidence intervals as an alternative to NHST.  Recently, approaches for estimating confidence intervals for effect size measures have also been introduced (Cummings & Finch, 2001; Kline, 2004).  The application of alternatives to NHST by management researchers, however, has been limited by both a lack of sensitivity regarding the inherent problems of NHST and a limited familiarity with alternative approaches.  Our two-hour workshop addresses these issues in the following three modules:

    • Critique of NHST (2 speakers)
    • Alternatives to NHST (1 speakers)
    • Round-table discussion for hands-on advice

    No pre-registration is required to attend this session.

    For further information on this session, please contact Andreas Schwab (aschwab@iastate.edu) or Ingo Holzinger (iholzinger@schulich.yorku.ca).