4 May 16:20 2016

### Fwd: R-sig-Geo Digest, Vol 153, Issue 4

John Lewis <jelewis02 <at> gmail.com>

2016-05-04 14:20:45 GMT

2016-05-04 14:20:45 GMT

Hi, I think there is a more fundamental problem that you should consider. The use of p values and set significant levels are seriously being questioned as good statistical modelling practises. You might want to look at the recent policy statement by the American Statistical Association on this topic. There is even a strong movement to convince editors not to review papers which base the results on the above methods or at least advise the use of different procedures. If you are interested in reading this policy statement I would be happy to send a pdf copy. Cheers, John Lewis ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Tue, 3 May 2016 23:11:29 +0000 (UTC) From: "Thiago V. dos Santos" <thi_veloso <at> yahoo.com.br> To: R-sig-geo Mailing List <r-sig-geo <at> r-project.org> Subject: [R-sig-Geo] Mask a map using statistical significance Message-ID: <1350390896.5790739.1462317089174.JavaMail.yahoo <at> mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Dear all, In climate studies, it is a common practice to perform some statistical test between two fields (maps), and then plot the resulting map using a significance mask. This masking is usually done by adding some kind of pattern (shading, crosshatching etc) on top of the actual color palette.(Continue reading)