My friend Chris Corrigan recently wrote a great blog post on weather and complexity, riffing off a statement from a retiring weather forecaster to talk about how to navigate complexity. One of my favourite COVID-era hobbies was tracking weather patterns with Chris and our friend Amanda. As systems swept in and out over the coast, we would announce in our group text the moment when rain reached our respective locations, from Nex̱wlélex̱wm/Bowen Island to East Van to New Westminister. Chris always has a fascinating app or person he follows on Twitter with cool maps and data about what is actually happening and the three of us got quite nerdy about it. (I'll never forget on the first night of the heat dome, when he showed me a heat map visualizing that column of hot, red air going straight up to the highest levels of the atmosphere, sitting on top of us with nowhere to go. Terrifying.)
Read morecomplexity and equity
I promised Jara I wouldn’t overthink this one and just get this off Twitter and into a blog post, and I’m really trying hard to live up to that. (I might have overthought “not overthinking it” though.) I also know that with how fast things are moving now, there’s a balance to be struck between deliberateness and irrelevance. The post I’m writing now isn’t the one I would have written last week, nor is it the one I’d write a month from now. It’s the one I’m writing in this moment, sitting on my couch in my apartment where I’ve been mostly alone for the two and a half weeks, since the global pandemic came crashing down on these shores.
Read morewe don’t need another p < 0.05
If you listened to our recent episode of Eval Cafe with Michael Quinn Patton on principles-focused evaluation, you’ll remember him sharing his new favourite example of principles in action. It’s from the introductory article of a recent special issue of The American Statistician, which is all about moving beyond the use of p < 0.05 as the threshold for determining statistical significance. The article offers an impassioned explanation of why abandoning the entire concept of statistical significance is necessary and also outlines the beginnings of an alternative practice for valuing and interpreting statistical findings. The reason it showed up in the podcast is because the authors ground this new framework in principles, or flexible advice that can guide decisions and give direction, but must be adapted and interpreted in context. In comparison, p < 0.05 is a rule—it is applied the same way regardless of any contextual factors. (Check out the podcast and also Michael’s book, Principles-Focused Evaluation, to learn more about the implications of principles for evaluative work.) Specifically, the principles that the authors offer are, “Accept uncertainty. Be thoughtful, open, and modest” (or “ATOM”, as a mnemonic), and the remainder of the issue (43 articles worth!) goes on to offer more depth around the issues of p < 0.05 and the discussion of alternatives.
For an academic publication about statistics, it is, frankly, stirring.
Read more