Conducting statistical tests of hypotheses : five common misconceptions found in transportation research

Most statistical methods use hypothesis testing. Analysis of variance, regression, discrete choice models, contingency tables, and other analysis methods commonly used in transportation research share hypothesis testing as the means of making inferences about the population of interest. Despite the fact that hypothesis testing has been a cornerstone of empirical research for many years, various aspects of hypothesis tests commonly are incorrectly applied, misinterpreted, and ignored—by novices and expert researchers alike. On initial glance, hypothesis testing appears straightforward: develop the null and alternative hypotheses, compute the test statistic to compare to a standard distribution, estimate the probability of rejecting the null hypothesis, and then make claims about the importance of the finding. This is an oversimplification of the process of hypothesis testing. Hypothesis testing as applied in empirical research is examined here. The reader is assumed to have a basic knowledge of the role of hypothesis testing in various statistical methods. Through the use of an example, the mechanics of hypothesis testing is first reviewed. Then, five precautions surrounding the use and interpretation of hypothesis tests are developed; examples of each are provided to demonstrate how errors are made, and solutions are identified so similar errors can be avoided. Remedies are provided for common errors, and conclusions are drawn on how to use the results of this paper to improve the conduct of empirical research in transportation.

Using formative feedback to identify and support first year chemistry students with missing or misconceptions. A Practice Report

Students entering tertiary studies possess a diverse range of prior experiences in their academic preparation for tertiary chemistry so academics need tools to enable them to respond to issues in diversity in conceptual models possessed by entering students. Concept inventories can be used to provide formative feedback to help students identify concepts that they need to address to improve construction of subsequent understanding enabling their learning. Modular, formative learning activities that can be administered inside or outside of class in first year chemistry courses have been developed. These activities address key missing and mis-conceptions possessed by incoming student. Engagement in these learning activities by students and academics will help shift the culture of diagnostic and formative assessment within the tertiary context and address issues around the secondary/tertiary transition. This diagnostic/intervention framework is currently being trialed across five Australian tertiary institutions encompassing a large heterogeneous sample of students.

Why is there no genetics in phylogenetics : misconceptions, clarification and solutions

Fundamental misconceptions regarding some basic phylogenetic terminology are presented in this opinion piece. An attempt is made to point out why these misconceptions exist and what may be causing the misapplication of terminology. Clarification is providing via basic definitions and simple explanations. Differences between the scientific fields of genetics and population genetics are discussed. The appropriate use of terminology is advocated and alternative terms are proposed to eliminate one potential source of confusion. It is suggested we use 'sequence data' instead of molecular data and 'non-sequence data' instead of morphological data in the field of phylogenetics and systematics.

Using textual analysis with Concept Inventories to identify root causes of misconceptions

Engineers must have deep and accurate conceptual understanding of their field and Concept inventories (CIs) are one method of assessing conceptual understanding and providing formative feedback. Current CI tests use Multiple Choice Questions (MCQ) to identify misconceptions and have undergone reliability and validity testing to assess conceptual understanding. However, they do not readily provide the diagnostic information about students’ reasoning and therefore do not effectively point to specific actions that can be taken to improve student learning. We piloted the textual component of our diagnostic CI on electrical engineering students using items from the signals and systems CI. We then analysed the textual responses using automated lexical analysis software to test the effectiveness of these types of software and interviewed the students regarding their experience using the textual component. Results from the automated text analysis revealed that students held both incorrect and correct ideas for certain conceptual areas and provided indications of student misconceptions. User feedback also revealed that the inclusion of the textual component is helpful to students in assessing and reflecting on their own understanding.

Uncovering misconceptions through text analysis

Assessing students’ conceptual understanding of technical content is important for instructors as well as students to learn content and apply knowledge in various contexts. Concept inventories that identify possible misconceptions through validated multiple-choice questions are helpful in identifying a misconception that may exist, but do not provide a meaningful assessment of why they exist or the nature of the students’ understanding. We conducted a case study with undergraduate students in an electrical engineering course by testing a validated multiple-choice response concept inventory that we augmented with a component for students to provide written explanations for their multiple-choice selection. Results revealed that correctly chosen multiple-choice selections did not always match correct conceptual understanding for question testing a specific concept. The addition of a text-response to multiple-choice concept inventory questions provided an enhanced and meaningful assessment of students’ conceptual understanding and highlighted variables associated with current concept inventories or multiple choice questions.

Cultural differences and postmerger problems: Misconceptions and cognitive simplifications.

Researchers and practitioners have increasingly explained post-merger organizational problems with cultural differences, especially in the context of cross-border mergers and acquisitions. It is suggested here that cultural differences have great explanatory power in the context of post-merger change processes. There are, however, problems with a number of superficial cultural conceptions that are common in research in this area and in managerial rhetoric. This critical article provocatively delineates misconceptions widely held by researchers and practitioners in this field, which not only disregard cultural differentiation, fragmentation, inconsistencies and ambiguities, but further, illustrate a lack of understanding of cultural permeability and embeddedness in the environment, an overemphasis on abstract values and lack of attention to organizational practices, an overemphasis on initial structural differences and lack of attention to the new cultural layer, a lack of recognition of the political dimensions and a failure to recognize cultural differences as sources of value and learning. In this article, the theoretical problems associated with these misconceptions are examined and new conceptual perspectives suggested. The risks at stake for decision makers are also discussed.

Checklists for grading object-oriented CS1 programs: concepts and misconceptions

Sanders, K. and Thomas, L. 2007. Checklists for grading object-oriented CS1 programs: concepts and misconceptions. In Proceedings of the 12th Annual SIGCSE Conference on innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (Dundee, Scotland, June 25 - 27, 2007). ITiCSE '07. ACM, New York, NY, 166-170

"To be accepted as normal": Public understanding and misconceptions concerning survivors of brain injury.

PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: To determine the views held by the general public in Northern Ireland towards survivors of brain injury. RESEARCH DESIGN: Qualitative semi-structured interviews. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: Interviews were conducted with 16 members of the general public. Ten questions addressed issues such as the role of survivors of brain injury in society, the challenges they face and the characteristics ascribed to them. MAIN OUTCOMES AND RESULTS: When asked to describe someone with a brain injury participants typically used negative labels and identified the most common problems as relating to physical, cognitive, emotional and social functioning. There was a general failure to recognize that brain injury was a 'hidden' disability, with most participants expecting some outward manifestation. Relatively few previous studies have employed a qualitative approach to explore how the public perceives survivors of brain injury. CONCLUSION: Members of the public have an increasing awareness of the challenges faced by survivors of brain injury. However, in spite of this, perceptions of aggressiveness, dependency and unhappiness were still evident, suggesting potential problems in reintegrating survivors of brain injury with their communities.

Children's errors in mathematics : understanding common misconceptions in primary schools.

Manual diseñado para ayudar a los profesores de primaria a identificar en los niños sus conceptos erróneos en matemáticas. Considera tres perspectivas diferentes: el nivel del plan de estudios, el nivel del aula y el nivel de cada alumno. La comprensión de cómo los niños construyen su conocimiento matemático y los errores que cometen, permite identificar y explicar por qué ocurre el error. También permite adelantarse a conceptos erróneos habituales y a planificar las lecciones. Tiene un índice con referencias cruzadas para el programa nacional británico.

‘Some Misconceptions about Requirements for the Post-2013 CAP’, ‘Supplementary written evidence’, and minutes of evidence of 19 January

Written evidence, and minutes of evidence, to the House of Commons Select Committee on Environment, Food and Rural Affairs enquiry into The Common Agricultural Policy after 2013