Thom Baguley points to the standardized or minimum LR (p381) to answer this question.
The minimum LR represents a worst case scenario for the null in that it compares the LR for against the MLE of the observed data, i.e. the most likely (strongest) possible hypothesis supported by the data, and is defined as
For samples drawn from a normal distribution with a known variance, this reduces to
At the limit of “significance” when = .05 and p=.05, this implies a z score of 1.96 in case of a normal distribution. The worst case scenario for H0 (the LR in favor of the null) is
![Rendered by QuickLaTeX.com H_1](https://vaszar.org/wordpress/wp-content/ql-cache/quicklatex.com-edfe2955fbee758d4113fd7ccf3cd3cf_l3.png)
![Rendered by QuickLaTeX.com 1/0.147](https://vaszar.org/wordpress/wp-content/ql-cache/quicklatex.com-d1061516863c26d5d6dfa43833c45012_l3.png)
![Rendered by QuickLaTeX.com H_0](https://vaszar.org/wordpress/wp-content/ql-cache/quicklatex.com-a4fc152da9c0802275c766010d183a54_l3.png)
1 Reply to “Does the p-value overestimate the strength of evidence?”