This chapter treats hypothesis testing as an opportunity for the researcher to distinguish between three possible explanations for a set of empirical findings: random chance, the scientific hypothesis of primary interest, and alternative scientific hypotheses. The methods it offers to advance this goal involve refining the null hypothesis, while increasing the scrutiny of the primary scientific hypothesis of interest and the number of alternative scientific hypotheses that it must compete with. These methods are brought to life in applications to home sales in New England, multiproduct pricing in Major League Baseball, turnout in Congressional elections, and the link between abortion and crime.
- Card D, Krueger A (1994) Minimum wages and employment: a case study of the fast food industry in New Jersey and Pennsylvania. Am Econ Rev 84(4):772–793Google Scholar
- Gelman A (2016) What has happened down here is the winds have changed. Blog Post. Available at http://andrewgelman.com/2016/09/21/what-has-happened-down-here-is-the-winds-have-changed/. Accessed 21 Sept 2016
- Ioannidis J (2005) Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Med 2:696–701Google Scholar
- Lehrer J (2010) The truth wears off. New Yorker:52–57Google Scholar
- Manzi J (2012) Uncontrolled: the surprising payoff of trial-and-error for business, politics, and society. Basic Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar