Literature DB >> 28000255

Combating the scientific decline effect with confidence (intervals).

David M Groppe1,2.   

Abstract

A symptom of the need for greater reproducibility in scientific practice is the decline effect-the fact that the size of many experimental effects decline with subsequent study or fail to replicate entirely. A simple way to combat this problem is for scientists to more routinely use confidence intervals (CIs) in their work. CIs provide frequentist bounds on the true size of an effect and can reveal when a statistically significant effect is possibly too small to be reliable or when a large effect might have been missed due to insufficient statistical power. CIs are often lacking in psychophysiological reports, likely due to the large number of dependent variables, which complicates deriving and visualizing CIs. In this article, I explain the value of CIs and show how to compute them for analyses involving multiple variables in various ways that adjust the intervals for the greater uncertainty induced by multiple statistical comparisons. The methods are illustrated using a basic visual oddball ERP dataset and freely available MATLAB software.
© 2016 Society for Psychophysiological Research.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Analysis/statistical methods; EEG; EMG; ERPs; MEG; Methods

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28000255     DOI: 10.1111/psyp.12616

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychophysiology        ISSN: 0048-5772            Impact factor:   4.016


  7 in total

1.  ICA-derived cortical responses indexing rapid multi-feature auditory processing in six-month-old infants.

Authors:  Caterina Piazza; Chiara Cantiani; Zeynep Akalin-Acar; Makoto Miyakoshi; April A Benasich; Gianluigi Reni; Anna Maria Bianchi; Scott Makeig
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2016-03-02       Impact factor: 6.556

2.  How many trials does it take to get a significant ERP effect? It depends.

Authors:  Megan A Boudewyn; Steven J Luck; Jaclyn L Farrens; Emily S Kappenman
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  2017-12-20       Impact factor: 4.016

3.  Statistical power: Implications for planning MEG studies.

Authors:  Maximilien Chaumon; Aina Puce; Nathalie George
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2021-03-16       Impact factor: 6.556

4.  Having your cake and eating it too: Flexibility and power with mass univariate statistics for ERP data.

Authors:  Eric C Fields; Gina R Kuperberg
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  2019-08-27       Impact factor: 4.016

5.  Aging-Related Differences in Structural and Functional Interhemispheric Connectivity.

Authors:  John D Lewis; Christian O'Reilly; Elizabeth Bock; Rebecca J Theilmann; Jeanne Townsend
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2022-03-30       Impact factor: 4.861

6.  AR2, a novel automatic artifact reduction software method for ictal EEG interpretation: Validation and comparison of performance with commercially available software.

Authors:  Shennan Aibel Weiss; Ali A Asadi-Pooya; Sitaram Vangala; Stephanie Moy; Dale H Wyeth; Iren Orosz; Michael Gibbs; Lara Schrader; Jason Lerner; Christopher K Cheng; Edward Chang; Rajsekar Rajaraman; Inna Keselman; Perdro Churchman; Christine Bower-Baca; Adam L Numis; Michael G Ho; Lekha Rao; Annapoorna Bhat; Joanna Suski; Marjan Asadollahi; Timothy Ambrose; Andres Fernandez; Maromi Nei; Christopher Skidmore; Scott Mintzer; Dawn S Eliashiv; Gary W Mathern; Marc R Nuwer; Michael Sperling; Jerome Engel; John M Stern
Journal:  F1000Res       Date:  2017-01-10

7.  Reliability of reward ERPs in middle-late adolescents using a custom and a standardized preprocessing pipeline.

Authors:  György Hámori; Alexandra Rádosi; Bea Pászthy; János M Réthelyi; István Ulbert; Richárd Fiáth; Nóra Bunford
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  2022-03-17       Impact factor: 4.348

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.