@misc{cogprints2892, volume = {14}, number = {1}, title = {Issues in Statistical Inference}, author = {Dr. Siu L. Chow}, year = {2002}, pages = {30--41}, journal = {History and Philosophy of Psychology Bulletin}, keywords = {Statistical inference, Experimental control, Significance tests, Statistical power, Effect size, Experimenter's expectancy effects, Meta-experiment, Meta-analysis, Sample size }, url = {http://cogprints.org/2892/}, abstract = {The APA Task Force?s treatment of research methods is critically examined. The present defense of the experiment rests on showing that (a) the control group cannot be replaced by the contrast group, (b) experimental psychologists have valid reasons to use non-randomly selected subjects, (c) there is no evidential support for the experimenter expectancy effect, (d) the Task Force had misrepresented the role of inductive and deductive logic, and (e) the validity of experimental data does not require appealing to the effect size or statistical power.} }