Literature DB >> 32523323

The Interpretation of Statistical Power after the Data have been Gathered.

John J Dziak1, Lisa C Dierker1,2, Beau Abar3.   

Abstract

Post-hoc power estimates (power calculated for hypothesis tests after performing them) are sometimes requested by reviewers in an attempt to promote more rigorous designs. However, they should never be requested or reported because they have been shown to be logically invalid and practically misleading. We review the problems associated with post-hoc power, particularly the fact that the resulting calculated power is a monotone function of the p-value and therefore contains no additional helpful information. We then discuss some situations that seem at first to call for post-hoc power analysis, such as attempts to decide on the practical implications of a null finding, or attempts to determine whether the sample size of a secondary data analysis is adequate for a proposed analysis, and consider possible approaches to achieving these goals. We make recommendations for practice in situations in which clear recommendations can be made, and point out other situations where further methodological research and discussion are required.

Entities:  

Keywords:  equivalence; exploratory data analysis; null hypothesis; post-hoc; power; replicability

Year:  2018        PMID: 32523323      PMCID: PMC7286546          DOI: 10.1007/s12144-018-0018-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Curr Psychol        ISSN: 1046-1310


  20 in total

Review 1.  Statistics notes: Analysing controlled trials with baseline and follow up measurements.

Authors:  A J Vickers; D G Altman
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2001-11-10

2.  Sample size estimation: a glimpse beyond simple formulas.

Authors:  John Eng
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 11.105

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.  Sample size calculations in randomised trials: mandatory and mystical.

Authors:  Kenneth F Schulz; David A Grimes
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2005 Apr 9-15       Impact factor: 79.321

Review 5.  Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience.

Authors:  Katherine S Button; John P A Ioannidis; Claire Mokrysz; Brian A Nosek; Jonathan Flint; Emma S J Robinson; Marcus R Munafò
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurosci       Date:  2013-04-10       Impact factor: 34.870

6.  Selecting a sample size for studies with repeated measures.

Authors:  Yi Guo; Henrietta L Logan; Deborah H Glueck; Keith E Muller
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2013-07-31       Impact factor: 4.615

7.  The earth is flat (p > 0.05): significance thresholds and the crisis of unreplicable research.

Authors:  Valentin Amrhein; Fränzi Korner-Nievergelt; Tobias Roth
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2017-07-07       Impact factor: 2.984

Review 8.  When Null Hypothesis Significance Testing Is Unsuitable for Research: A Reassessment.

Authors:  Denes Szucs; John P A Ioannidis
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2017-08-03       Impact factor: 3.169

9.  Equivalence Tests: A Practical Primer for t Tests, Correlations, and Meta-Analyses.

Authors:  Daniël Lakens
Journal:  Soc Psychol Personal Sci       Date:  2017-05-05

10.  The p-Value You Can't Buy.

Authors:  Eugene Demidenko
Journal:  Am Stat       Date:  2016-03-31       Impact factor: 8.710

View more
  7 in total

1.  Sexual Harassment and Assault During Deployment: Associations with Treatment Outcomes Among Veterans with Co-occurring PTSD and SUD.

Authors:  Christine K Hahn; Amber M Jarnecke; Casey Calhoun; Alex Melkonian; Julianne C Flanagan; Sudie E Back
Journal:  Mil Psychol       Date:  2021-10-08

2.  Effect of Weight Goals on Sitting and Moving During a Worksite Sedentary Time Reduction Intervention.

Authors:  Krista S Leonard; Junia N de Brito; Miranda L Larouche; Sarah A Rydell; Nathan R Mitchell; Mark A Pereira; Matthew P Buman
Journal:  Transl J Am Coll Sports Med       Date:  2022-09-15

3.  Post hoc power is not informative.

Authors:  Lacey W Heinsberg; Daniel E Weeks
Journal:  Genet Epidemiol       Date:  2022-06-01       Impact factor: 2.344

4.  More Than a Momentary Blip in the Universe? Investigating the Link Between Religiousness and Perceived Meaning in Life.

Authors:  Michael Prinzing; Patty Van Cappellen; Barbara L Fredrickson
Journal:  Pers Soc Psychol Bull       Date:  2021-12-29

5.  Saccade dynamics during an online updating task change with healthy aging.

Authors:  Jessica L O'Rielly; Anna Ma-Wyatt
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2020-12-02       Impact factor: 2.240

6.  Impact of restoring male fertility with transplantation of in vitro propagated spermatogonial stem cells on the health of their offspring throughout life.

Authors:  Joana B Serrano; Rik van Eekelen; Cindy M de Winter-Korver; Saskia K M van Daalen; Nils C Tabeling; Lisa A E Catsburg; Marion J J Gijbels; Callista L Mulder; Ans M M van Pelt
Journal:  Clin Transl Med       Date:  2021-10

7.  Examining the role of social support in treatment for co-occurring substance use disorder and posttraumatic stress disorder.

Authors:  Amber M Jarnecke; Tanya C Saraiya; Delisa G Brown; James Richardson; Therese Killeen; Sudie E Back
Journal:  Addict Behav Rep       Date:  2022-04-11
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.