Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

The Scientific Method01:32

The Scientific Method

225.7K
The scientific method is a detailed, empirical problem-solving process used by biologists and other scientists. This iterative approach involves formulating a question based on observation, developing a testable potential explanation for the observation (called a hypothesis), making and testing predictions based on the hypothesis, and using the findings to create new hypotheses and predictions.
Generally, predictions are tested using carefully-designed experiments. Based on the outcome of these...
225.7K
Decision Making: Traditional Method01:14

Decision Making: Traditional Method

4.0K
The process of hypothesis testing based on the traditional method includes calculating the critical value, testing the value of the test statistic using the sample data, and interpreting these values.
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is decided based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to this claim is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses, out of which a null hypothesis would be a...
4.0K
Empirical Method to Interpret Standard Deviation01:09

Empirical Method to Interpret Standard Deviation

5.2K
The empirical rule, also known as the three-sigma rule, allows a statistician to interpret the standard deviation in a normally distributed dataset. The rule states that 68% of the data lies within one standard deviation from the mean, 95% lies within two standard deviations from the mean, and 99.7% lies within three standard deviations from the mean. Additionally, this rule is also called the 68-95-99.7 rule.
This rule is used widely in statistics to calculate the proportion of data values...
5.2K
Hypothesis: Accept or Fail to Reject?01:17

Hypothesis: Accept or Fail to Reject?

27.7K
The outcome of any hypothesis testing leads to rejecting or not rejecting the null hypothesis. This decision is taken based on the analysis of the data, an appropriate test statistic, an appropriate confidence level, the critical values, and P-values. However, when the evidence suggests that the null hypothesis cannot be rejected, is it right to say, 'Accept' the null hypothesis?
There are two ways to indicate that the null hypothesis is not rejected. 'Accept' the null...
27.7K
Detection of Gross Error: The Q Test01:00

Detection of Gross Error: The Q Test

5.8K
When one or more data points appear far from the rest of the data, there is a need to determine whether they are outliers and whether they should be eliminated from the data set to ensure an accurate representation of the measured value. In many cases, outliers arise from gross errors (or human errors) and do not accurately reflect the underlying phenomenon. In some cases, however, these apparent outliers reflect true phenomenological differences. In these cases, we can use statistical methods...
5.8K
Significance Testing: Overview01:04

Significance Testing: Overview

3.3K
Significance testing is a set of statistical methods used to test whether a claim about a parameter is valid. In analytical chemistry, significance testing is used primarily to determine whether the difference between two values comes from determinate or random errors. The effect of a particular change in the measurement protocol, analyst, or sample itself can cause a deviation from the expected result. In the case of a suspected deviation/outlier, we need to be able to confirm mathematically...
3.3K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same journal

The effect of nasal olfactory stimulation on apnea of prematurity: a randomized cross-over trial.

Pediatric research·2026
Same journal

Perspectives on genomic newborn screening studies: design, implementation, and outcomes.

Pediatric research·2026
Same journal

Research progress and trends of Mycoplasma pneumoniae pneumonia in children: a bibliometric and visualization analysis (1990s to post-COVID-19 era).

Pediatric research·2026
Same journal

Extrauterine growth restriction definitions and associated factors among Colombian preterm infants: a case control study.

Pediatric research·2026
Same journal

Association of maternal cardiovascular health in early-to-mid pregnancy with offspring cardiovascular phenotypes in early childhood: a prospective birth cohort study.

Pediatric research·2026
Same journal

Associations of maternal CDKAL1 gene with adverse offspring growth patterns.

Pediatric research·2026

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jun 19, 2025

Ole Isacson: Development of New Therapies for Parkinson's Disease
23:53

Ole Isacson: Development of New Therapies for Parkinson's Disease

Published on: April 29, 2007

8.0K

How scientists should disagree.

Alex B Berezow1

  • 1, Greater Seattle, WA, USA. alex.berezow@gmail.com.

Pediatric Research
|July 24, 2024
PubMed
Summary

Scientific discourse is declining due to a lack of civility. Understanding common reasons for disagreement, like miscommunication and pride, can foster a more respectful scientific community.

Area of Science:

  • Social Sciences
  • Scientific Communication

Background:

  • A decline in civility is evident in scientific discourse, mirroring broader societal trends.
  • Disagreements often involve accusations of scientists being "shills" or influenced by external interests.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To analyze the root causes of incivility in scientific discourse.
  • To propose strategies for fostering a more civil scientific community.

Main Methods:

  • The study reviews common patterns of disagreement in scientific discussions.
  • It applies principles like "Hanlon's Razor" to interpret scientists' motivations.

Main Results:

  • Most scientific disagreements stem from good intentions, communication failures, cognitive biases, or professional pride.

More Related Videos

Probing the Limits of Egg Recognition Using Egg Rejection Experiments Along Phenotypic Gradients
07:34

Probing the Limits of Egg Recognition Using Egg Rejection Experiments Along Phenotypic Gradients

Published on: August 22, 2018

8.2K
Predicting the Effectiveness of Population Replacement Strategy Using Mathematical Modeling
20:36

Predicting the Effectiveness of Population Replacement Strategy Using Mathematical Modeling

Published on: July 4, 2007

8.7K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jun 19, 2025

Ole Isacson: Development of New Therapies for Parkinson's Disease
23:53

Ole Isacson: Development of New Therapies for Parkinson's Disease

Published on: April 29, 2007

8.0K
Probing the Limits of Egg Recognition Using Egg Rejection Experiments Along Phenotypic Gradients
07:34

Probing the Limits of Egg Recognition Using Egg Rejection Experiments Along Phenotypic Gradients

Published on: August 22, 2018

8.2K
Predicting the Effectiveness of Population Replacement Strategy Using Mathematical Modeling
20:36

Predicting the Effectiveness of Population Replacement Strategy Using Mathematical Modeling

Published on: July 4, 2007

8.7K
  • Accusations of corruption or malicious intent are rarely the primary cause.

    • Conclusions:

    • Promoting civility in scientific discourse is crucial for the integrity of science.
    • The scientific community can serve as a model for a more civil society by addressing incivility proactively.