000			01770naa a2200193uu 4500
001			5092116030117
003			OSt
005			20190211160136.0
008			050921s2005 xx ||||gr |0|| 0 eng d
100	1		_aWEISBURD, David; LUM, Cynthia M.; YANG, Sue-Ming _921838
245	1	0	_aWhen Can We Conclude That Treatments or Programs "Don't Work"?
260			_aThousand Oaks : _bSage Publications, _cMay 2003
520	3		_aIn this article, the authors examine common practices of reporting statiscally nonsignificant findings in criminal justice evaluation studies. They find that criminal justice evaluators often make formal erros in the reporting of statistically nonsignificant results. Instead of simply concluding that the results were not statistically significant, or that there is not enough evidence to support an effect of treatment, they often mistakenly accept the null hypothesis and state that the intervention had no impact or did not work. The authors propose that researches define a second null hypothesis that sets a mininal threshold for program effectiveness. In an illustration of this approach, they find that more than half of the studies that had no statistically significant findings for a traditional, no difference null hypothesis evidenced a statistically significant result in the case of a minimal worthwhile treatment effect null hypothesis
650		4	_aWhat works; Null Hypothesis Significance Testing; Effect Sizes; Statistical Significance; Statistical Power _921839
773	0	8	_tThe Annals of The American Academy of Political and Social Science _g587, p. 31-48 _dThousand Oaks : Sage Publications, May 2003 _xISSN 0002-7162 _w
942			_cS
998			_a20050921 _b1603^b _cAnaluiza
998			_a20050930 _b1524^b _cAnaluiza
999			_aConvertido do Formato PHL _bPHL2MARC21 1.1 _c13630 _d13630
041			_aeng