The Substitute For P-values paper is popular. Received an email from the American Statistical Association informing me of the unusual viewing activity. The email copies this earlier email (I’m cutting out the names):
No problem! I also wanted to let you know of another article that appeared as one of “Taylor & Francis’ top ten Altmetrics articles” last week (and is still doing well). It’s “The Substitute for p-Values,” by William M. Briggs (Vol 112, Issue 519 of JASA). So far, it’s seen 149 tweets from 143 users, with an upper bound of 150,371 followers! Below is the Altmetric score:
All the best,
I had never heard of Altmetric, but on looking at their list of the top 100 papers of 2015, paper number 100 had a score of 854 (top had 2782). Fame still awaits.
Paper 100, incidentally, was “Human language reveals a universal positivity bias.” Not at this blog, buster.
The main email said this:
Dear Dr. Briggs, I just thought I would make you aware that your comment “The Substitute for p-Values” (http://amstat.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01621459.2017.1311264)
Has been viewed more than 3,000 times and is still very popular on social media (see below).
Thank you so much for your contribution to JASA! [E], ASA Journals Manager
The link to the official paper is above (here too). The original post about it is here. The book page for Uncertainty, which contains all the meat and proofs of contentions in the paper, is here. Uncertainty can be bought here.
Don’t miss the free Data Science course, which puts all the ideas of the paper into action. This course is neither frequentist nor Bayesian nor machine learning/artificial intelligence, but pure probability.
Just look at that! The editors “best books” next to readers’ favorite book. The p-value measuring this correlation must be mighty wee! Weer than wee! Wee wee. All the way home!