Literature DB >> 17201351

Beyond statistical inference: a decision theory for science.

Peter R Killeen1.   

Abstract

Traditional null hypothesis significance testing does not yield the probability of the null or its alternative and, therefore, cannot logically ground scientific decisions. The decision theory proposed here calculates the expected utility of an effect on the basis of (1) the probability of replicating it and (2) a utility function on its size. It takes significance tests--which place all value on the replicability of an effect and none on its magnitude--as a special case, one in which the cost of a false positive is revealed to be an order of magnitude greater than the value of a true positive. More realistic utility functions credit both replicability and effect size, integrating them for a single index of merit. The analysis incorporates opportunity cost and is consistent with alternate measures of effect size, such as r2 and information transmission, and with Bayesian model selection criteria. An alternate formulation is functionally equivalent to the formal theory, transparent, and easy to compute.

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17201351      PMCID: PMC2593477          DOI: 10.3758/bf03193962

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev        ISSN: 1069-9384


  10 in total

1.  A sensible formulation of the significance test.

Authors:  L V Jones; J W Tukey
Journal:  Psychol Methods       Date:  2000-12

2.  Editors can lead researchers to confidence intervals, but can't make them think: statistical reform lessons from medicine.

Authors:  Fiona Fidler; Neil Thomason; Geoff Cumming; Sue Finch; Joanna Leeman
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2004-02

3.  N=1.

Authors:  W F DUKES
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1965-07       Impact factor: 17.737

4.  An alternative to null-hypothesis significance tests.

Authors:  Peter R Killeen
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2005-05

5.  Why replication probabilities depend on prior probability distributions: a rejoinder to Killeen (2005).

Authors:  Ranald R Macdonald
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2005-12

6.  Probability of replication revisited: comment on "An alternative to Null-Hypothesis Significance Tests.".

Authors:  Gheorghe Doros; Andrew B Geier
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2005-12

7.  Replicability, confidence, and priors.

Authors:  Peter R Killeen
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2005-12

8.  A Bayesian perspective on hypothesis testing: a comment on Killeen (2005).

Authors:  Eric-Jan Wagenmakers; Peter Grünwald
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2006-07

9.  Bayesian statistical inference in psychology: comment on Trafimow (2003).

Authors:  Michael D Lee; Eric-Jan Wagenmakers
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 8.934

10.  Effect sizes and p values: what should be reported and what should be replicated?

Authors:  A G Greenwald; R Gonzalez; R J Harris; D Guthrie
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  1996-03       Impact factor: 4.016

  10 in total
  9 in total

1.  Replication is not coincidence: reply to Iverson, Lee, and Wagenmakers (2009).

Authors:  Bruno Lecoutre; Peter R Killeen
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2010-04

2.  A practical solution to the pervasive problems of p values.

Authors:  Eric-Jan Wagenmakers
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2007-10

3.  P(rep) misestimates the probability of replication.

Authors:  Geoffrey J Iverson; Michael D Lee; Eric-Jan Wagenmakers
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2009-04

4.  Bayesian t tests for accepting and rejecting the null hypothesis.

Authors:  Jeffrey N Rouder; Paul L Speckman; Dongchu Sun; Richard D Morey; Geoffrey Iverson
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2009-04

5.  BETTER STATISTICS FOR BETTER DECISIONS: REJECTING NULL HYPOTHESES STATISTICAL TESTS IN FAVOR OF REPLICATION STATISTICS.

Authors:  Federico Sanabria; Peter R Killeen
Journal:  Psychol Sch       Date:  2007-05

6.  What is the probability of replicating a statistically significant effect?

Authors:  Jeff Miller
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2009-08

7.  The optimal level of fuzz: Case studies in a methodology for psychological research.

Authors:  Arthur B Markman; Jennifer S Beer; Lisa R Grimm; Jonathan R Rein; W Todd Maddox
Journal:  J Exp Theor Artif Intell       Date:  2009-09-01       Impact factor: 2.340

8.  Ethics and animal numbers: informal analyses, uncertain sample sizes, inefficient replications, and type I errors.

Authors:  Douglas A Fitts
Journal:  J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci       Date:  2011-07       Impact factor: 1.232

9.  Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness Against Null Hypothesis Significance Testing.

Authors:  Miguel A García-Pérez
Journal:  Educ Psychol Meas       Date:  2016-10-05       Impact factor: 2.821

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.