Item

Abstract

We consider trends in the m seasonal subrecords of a record. To determine the statistical significance of the m trends, one usually determines the p value of each season either numerically or analytically and compares it with a significance level α~. We show in great detail for short- and long-term persistent records that this procedure, which is standard in climate science, is inadequate since it produces too many false positives (false discoveries). We specify, on the basis of the family wise error rate and by adapting ideas from multiple testing correction approaches, how the procedure must be changed to obtain more suitable significance criteria for the m trends. Our analysis is valid for data with all kinds of persistence. Specifically for long-term persistent data, we derive simple analytical expressions for the quantities of interest, which allow to determine easily the statistical significance of a trend in a seasonal record. As an application, we focus on 17 Antarctic station data. We show that only four trends in the seasonal temperature data are outside the bounds of natural variability, in marked contrast to earlier conclusions.