Six behavioral statistics textbooks listed by their publishers as "bestsellers" during 1982 were reviewed by the author. The intent was to detect the presence of and discuss the nature of some theoretical inferential inaccuracies, misinterpretations, and errors, that is, statistical "myths and misconceptions." Approximately 43 quotes were found that to some degree reflected misconceptions of statistical theory and that may mislead the behavioral researcher. These quotes were classified in general categories of half-truths, definitional errors, constant-cum-variable, cartbefore-the-horse, and unitary inference.

No abstract

No abstract

A calculation of the probability of rejecting H0 when it should be rejected (power) was completed on each of the 66 applicable articles in Volumes 6 and 7 (1969, 1970) of the Journal of Research in Science Teaching. These power calculations utilized the effect size definitions and tables developed by Cohen (1969). The mean power of each article to detect small, medium, and large effect sizes was determined from its major statistical tests. These mean powers were then compiled and analyzed. The powers calculated for the different effect sizes were disturbingly low (small, 0.22; medium, 0.71; large, 0.87) but not generally as low as Cohen (1962) found in an analysis of another behavioral journal. Recommendations for improving confidence in research in science teaching is provided and centers on significant increases in sample sizes and an understanding of power and its relation to a, effect size and sample size.

The power of statistical tests recently appearing in the JEM was determined using the power calculation guidelines proposed by Cohen (1969). All the articles containing tests of significance were surveyed. The results indicated that power was generally below .50 for small effect sizes and above .50 for medium and large effect sizes. A suggestion for reporting statistical results to include power of the tests was made.