Literature DB >> 29795934

Using the Coefficient of Confidence to Make the Philosophical Switch From A Posteriori to A Priori Inferential Statistics.

David Trafimow1.   

Abstract

There has been much controversy over the null hypothesis significance testing procedure, with much of the criticism centered on the problem of inverse inference. Specifically, p gives the probability of the finding (or one more extreme) given the null hypothesis, whereas the null hypothesis significance testing procedure involves drawing a conclusion about the null hypothesis given the finding. Many critics have called for null hypothesis significance tests to be replaced with confidence intervals. However, confidence intervals also suffer from a version of the inverse inference problem. The only known solution to the inverse inference problem is to use the famous theorem by Bayes, but this involves commitments that many researchers are not willing to make. However, it is possible to ask a useful question for which inverse inference is not a problem and that leads to the computation of the coefficient of confidence. In turn, and much more important, using the coefficient of confidence implies the desirability of switching from the current emphasis on a posteriori inferential statistics to an emphasis on a priori inferential statistics.

Keywords:  a posteriori statistics; a priori statistics; coefficient of confidence; confidence interval; squared coefficient of confidence; standard error of the mean

Year:  2016        PMID: 29795934      PMCID: PMC5965632          DOI: 10.1177/0013164416667977

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Educ Psychol Meas        ISSN: 0013-1644            Impact factor:   2.821


  15 in total

1.  The fallacy of the null-hypothesis significance test.

Authors:  W W ROZEBOOM
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1960-09       Impact factor: 17.737

2.  Irreproducible experimental results: causes, (mis)interpretations, and consequences.

Authors:  Joseph Loscalzo
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2012-03-13       Impact factor: 29.690

3.  False-positive psychology: undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant.

Authors:  Joseph P Simmons; Leif D Nelson; Uri Simonsohn
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2011-10-17

4.  A test of the null hypothesis significance testing procedure correlation argument.

Authors:  David Trafimow; Stephen Rice
Journal:  J Gen Psychol       Date:  2009-07

5.  Why Science Is Not Necessarily Self-Correcting.

Authors:  John P A Ioannidis
Journal:  Perspect Psychol Sci       Date:  2012-11

6.  Editors' Introduction to the Special Section on Replicability in Psychological Science: A Crisis of Confidence?

Authors:  Harold Pashler; Eric-Jan Wagenmakers
Journal:  Perspect Psychol Sci       Date:  2012-11

7.  The test of significance in psychological research.

Authors:  D Bakan
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1966-12       Impact factor: 17.737

8.  Descriptive vs. inferential cheating.

Authors:  David Trafimow
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2013-09-11

9.  Why most published research findings are false.

Authors:  John P A Ioannidis
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2005-08-30       Impact factor: 11.613

10.  The fallacy of placing confidence in confidence intervals.

Authors:  Richard D Morey; Rink Hoekstra; Jeffrey N Rouder; Michael D Lee; Eric-Jan Wagenmakers
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2016-02
View more
  2 in total

1.  Making the A Priori Procedure Work for Differences Between Means.

Authors:  David Trafimow; Cong Wang; Tonghui Wang
Journal:  Educ Psychol Meas       Date:  2019-05-14       Impact factor: 2.821

2.  Proving a negative? Methodological, statistical, and psychometric flaws in Ullmann et al. (2017) PTSD study.

Authors:  Gregory J Boyle
Journal:  J Clin Transl Res       Date:  2018-03-25
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.