对所有结果使用一个系统,以避免矛盾:使用显著性检验、等效性检验和贝叶斯系数的建议。

IF 2.1 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY Journal of Experimental Psychology-Human Perception and Performance Pub Date : 2024-05-01 DOI:10.1037/xhp0001202
Zoltan Dienes
{"title":"对所有结果使用一个系统,以避免矛盾:使用显著性检验、等效性检验和贝叶斯系数的建议。","authors":"Zoltan Dienes","doi":"10.1037/xhp0001202","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A nonsignificant result against an H0 of no effect does not distinguish evidence for no effect from no evidence at all one way or the other. Thus, a researcher engaged primarily in significance testing may decide to follow up just the nonsignificant results with a test from another system of inference, such as equivalence tests (more generally, inference by intervals) or Bayes factors. However, selectively using two systems of inference in this way, can lead to inferential inconsistency because different tests are based on different principles, and therefore a researcher can be tempted to select the way each system is used to get the results the researcher wants for just the tests that system is applied to. For a related set of tests, one system of inference should be consistently used. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":50195,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Human Perception and Performance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Use one system for all results to avoid contradiction: Advice for using significance tests, equivalence tests, and Bayes factors.\",\"authors\":\"Zoltan Dienes\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/xhp0001202\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>A nonsignificant result against an H0 of no effect does not distinguish evidence for no effect from no evidence at all one way or the other. Thus, a researcher engaged primarily in significance testing may decide to follow up just the nonsignificant results with a test from another system of inference, such as equivalence tests (more generally, inference by intervals) or Bayes factors. However, selectively using two systems of inference in this way, can lead to inferential inconsistency because different tests are based on different principles, and therefore a researcher can be tempted to select the way each system is used to get the results the researcher wants for just the tests that system is applied to. For a related set of tests, one system of inference should be consistently used. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50195,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Human Perception and Performance\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Human Perception and Performance\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0001202\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Human Perception and Performance","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0001202","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

针对 "无效应 H0 "的非显著性结果并不能以某种方式区分 "无效应 "和 "无证据"。因此,主要从事显著性检验的研究人员可能会决定仅对不显著的结果进行后续检验,而采用另一种推理系统,如等效检验(更广泛地说,区间推理)或贝叶斯因子。然而,以这种方式有选择地使用两种推论系统,可能会导致推论的不一致性,因为不同的检验基于不同的原理,因此,研究人员可能会倾向于选择使用每种系统的方式,以便仅在应用该系统的检验中获得研究人员想要的结果。对于一组相关的测试,应始终使用一种推论系统。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, 版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Use one system for all results to avoid contradiction: Advice for using significance tests, equivalence tests, and Bayes factors.

A nonsignificant result against an H0 of no effect does not distinguish evidence for no effect from no evidence at all one way or the other. Thus, a researcher engaged primarily in significance testing may decide to follow up just the nonsignificant results with a test from another system of inference, such as equivalence tests (more generally, inference by intervals) or Bayes factors. However, selectively using two systems of inference in this way, can lead to inferential inconsistency because different tests are based on different principles, and therefore a researcher can be tempted to select the way each system is used to get the results the researcher wants for just the tests that system is applied to. For a related set of tests, one system of inference should be consistently used. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
9.50%
发文量
145
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance publishes studies on perception, control of action, perceptual aspects of language processing, and related cognitive processes.
期刊最新文献
Speeded classification of visual events is sensitive to crossmodal intensity correspondence. Proactive suppression is an implicit process that cannot be summoned on demand. First impressions from faces in dynamic approach-avoidance contexts. Between-task transfer of item-specific control is replicable and extends to novel conditions. No evidence in favor of the existence of "intentional" binding.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1