MAGIC criteria
From HandWiki
Short description: Set of guidelines for using statistical analysis
The MAGIC criteria are a set of guidelines put forth by Robert Abelson in his 1995 book Statistics as Principled Argument.[1] In this book he posits that the goal of statistical analysis should be to make compelling claims about the world[2] and he presents the MAGIC criteria as a way to do that.
What are the MAGIC criteria?
MAGIC is a backronym for:
- Magnitude – How big is the effect? Large effects are more compelling than small ones.
- Articulation – How specific is it?[3] Precise statements are more compelling than imprecise ones.
- Generality – How generally does it apply?[2] More general effects are more compelling than less general ones. Claims that would interest a more general audience are more compelling.[3]
- Interestingness – interesting effects are those that "have the potential, through empirical analysis, to change what people believe about an important issue".[2] More interesting effects are more compelling than less interesting ones. In addition, more surprising effects are more compelling than ones that merely confirm what is already known.[3]
- Credibility – Credible claims are more compelling than incredible ones. The researcher must show that the claims made are credible.[2] Results that contradict previously established ones are less credible.[3]
Reviews and applications of the MAGIC criteria
Song Qian noted that the MAGIC criteria could be of use to ecologists.[4] Claudia Stanny discussed them in a course on psychology.[5] Anne Boomsma noted that they are useful when presenting results of complex statistical methods such as structural equation modelling.[6]
See also
- Philosophy:Bradford Hill criteria – Criteria for measuring cause and effect
References
- ↑ Abelson, Robert P. (1995). Statistics as principled argument. Internet Archive. Hillsdale, N.J. : L. Erlbaum Associates. ISBN 978-0-585-17659-8. http://archive.org/details/statisticsasprin0000abel.
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 "The MAGIC Criteria". jsvine.com. 16 February 2015. http://drafts.jsvine.com/the-magic-criteria/. Retrieved 13 February 2020.
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 "Criteria for a persuasive statistical argument: MAGIC". Simon Fraser University. https://www2.cs.sfu.ca/CourseCentral/376/ted/376-08-1/MAGIC-criteria.pdf. Retrieved 13 February 2020. "Adapted from Abelson, Robert P. (1995). Statistics as principled argument. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 12–14."
- ↑ Qian, Song (2014). "Statistics in ecology is for making a "principled argument"". Landscape Ecology 29 (6): 937–939. doi:10.1007/s10980-014-0042-y.
- ↑ Caludia, Stanny. "404 – Page Not Found | University of West Florida". http://uwf.edu/cstanny/website/ResearchDsgn/statistical%20claims%20abelson%201&2%20-%203%20slides.pdf.
- ↑ Boomsma, Anne (2000). "Reporting Analysis of Covariance Studies". Structural Equation Modeling 7: 461–483. doi:10.1207/S15328007SEM0703_6.
 |  |
