Misunderstanding and misrepresentation: a reply to Hutchison and Schagen

Misunderstanding and misrepresentation: a reply to Hutchison and Schagen
复制标题

误解和误传:对 Hutchison 和 Schagen 的答复

DOI:
10.1080/17437270902749197
复制
发表时间:
2009
影响因子:
2
通讯作者:
Gorard S
Gorard S
中科院分区:
--
文献类型:
--
作者:
Gorard S

文献摘要

参考文献

被引文献

相似文献

在这本杂志上,我以前发表了一篇论文,讨论如何基于集群样本进行分析。在那篇论文中,我概述了几种被广泛采用的替代方法,并指出这种方法对于人口数字来说无论如何都是不必要的,对于非概率样本也是不可能的(Gorard 2007)。因此,我质疑复杂方法的普及性和相关性,如多水平建模(MLM),用于大多数现实生活中的分析。在最近的一些研究中,我说明了通过传销和其他方法获得的结果缺乏实质性差异。我重复了我的挑战(来自Gorard 2003a),要求那些倡导使用传销的人找到并发表一项真正的研究,其中研究的政策或实践影响将根据是否使用传销或合理的替代方案而有所不同。Hutchison and Schagen(2008)没有接受这一挑战,而是以一篇歪曲(甚至错误引用)我所说的话的论文作为回应,试图为他们青睐的传销技术辩护。在我这里给他们的答复中,我希望证明他们对这一重要议题的误解。这可能会让读者认为,这将是一篇关于统计问题的高度技术性的论文。但事实并非如此。我也希望证实他们对我的论文的歪曲。与传销是否有任何重大价值的表面争论相比,这个问题是一个更广泛、更令人担忧的问题。它是关于我们准备作为一个领域支持的那种智力过程。1
In this journal, I previously published a paper discussing how to conduct an analysis based on a cluster sample. In that paper, I outlined several widely adopted alternative approaches, and pointed out that such approaches are anyway not needed for population figures, and not possible for non-probability samples (Gorard 2007). Thus, I queried the prevalence and relevance of complex approaches such as multi-level modelling (MLM) for most real-life analyses. I illustrated the lack of substantive difference in the results obtained via MLM and other approaches in a number of recent studies. And I repeated my challenge (from Gorard 2003a) for those advocating the use of MLM to find and publish a real study in which the policy or practice implications of the research would differ depending on whether MLM or a sensible alternative was used.Instead of taking up this challenge, Hutchison and Schagen (2008) responded with a paper that misrepresents (and even misquotes) what I said, in an attempt to defend their favoured technique of MLM. In my reply to them here, I hope to establish their misunderstanding of this important topic. This might lead readers to imagine that this will be a highly technical paper about a statistical issue. It is not. I also hope to establish their misrepresentation of my paper. The issue is one of wider and greater concern than the surface argument about whether MLM is of any great value. It is about the kind of intellectual processes we are prepared to endorse as a field. 1
什么才是重要的以及什么应该被视为证据
DOI: --
发表时间: 2007
期刊:
影响因子: --
作者:
T. Cook;S. Gorard
通讯作者: S. Gorard
和谐与不和谐:多层次建模的艺术
DOI: --
发表时间: 2008
期刊:
影响因子: --
作者:
D. Hutchison;I. Schagen
通讯作者: I. Schagen
捍卫中间道路:对普勒维斯和菲尔丁的答复
DOI: --
发表时间: 2003
期刊:
影响因子: --
作者:
S. Gorard
通讯作者: S. Gorard
成绩不佳仍然是一个丑陋的词:重新考虑英格兰和威尔士学校的相对有效性
DOI: --
发表时间: 2000
期刊:
影响因子: --
作者:
S. Gorard
通讯作者: S. Gorard
将多层次分析与国家增值数据集相结合——探索学校多样性影响的案例研究
DOI: 10.1080/01411920500082144
发表时间: 2005
影响因子: 2.3
作者:
I. Schagen;S. Schagen
通讯作者: S. Schagen