统计上显著的吗?让我们认识到,对试验效果的估计是不确定的

Pub Date : 2021-10-29 DOI:10.1177/20515707211040743
A. Bultez, C. Derbaix, Jean-Luc Herrmann
{"title":"统计上显著的吗?让我们认识到,对试验效果的估计是不确定的","authors":"A. Bultez, C. Derbaix, Jean-Luc Herrmann","doi":"10.1177/20515707211040743","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Haven’t all of us dreamt of concluding that our results be statistically significant, that is, characterized by a p-value lying below an arbitrary threshold, most often 5 % ? In this article, we, first, deplore that p has been largely misunderstood, and that its misinterpretation has entailed a fallacious dichotomization and an understatement of the uncertainty prevailing about the effect tested. Next, we introduce and explain a brand-new – direct – measure of the plausibility of the effect under study. Then, we illustrate the relevance of this indicator by revisiting a recently published marketing research case. We also insist on the necessity to contextualize it, using complementary credibility intervals graphically contrasted. Beyond making researchers aware of the exact meaning of test-related probabilities, the delineated approach invites them to formulate their inferences with prudence and modesty acknowledging how uncertain these are.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Statistically significant? Let us recognize that estimates of tested effects are uncertain\",\"authors\":\"A. Bultez, C. Derbaix, Jean-Luc Herrmann\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/20515707211040743\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Haven’t all of us dreamt of concluding that our results be statistically significant, that is, characterized by a p-value lying below an arbitrary threshold, most often 5 % ? In this article, we, first, deplore that p has been largely misunderstood, and that its misinterpretation has entailed a fallacious dichotomization and an understatement of the uncertainty prevailing about the effect tested. Next, we introduce and explain a brand-new – direct – measure of the plausibility of the effect under study. Then, we illustrate the relevance of this indicator by revisiting a recently published marketing research case. We also insist on the necessity to contextualize it, using complementary credibility intervals graphically contrasted. Beyond making researchers aware of the exact meaning of test-related probabilities, the delineated approach invites them to formulate their inferences with prudence and modesty acknowledging how uncertain these are.\",\"PeriodicalId\":0,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/20515707211040743\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20515707211040743","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

难道我们所有人都没有想过得出这样的结论:我们的结果具有统计学意义,即p值低于任意阈值,通常为5%?在这篇文章中,我们首先感到遗憾的是,p在很大程度上被误解了,对它的误解导致了错误的二分法,并低估了测试效果的不确定性。接下来,我们介绍并解释了一种全新的、直接的、衡量所研究效果合理性的方法。然后,我们通过回顾最近发表的一个营销研究案例来说明这一指标的相关性。我们还坚持有必要将其背景化,使用图形对比的互补可信度区间。除了让研究人员意识到测试相关概率的确切含义外,所描述的方法还邀请他们谨慎和谦虚地制定推论,承认这些概率的不确定性。
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
Statistically significant? Let us recognize that estimates of tested effects are uncertain
Haven’t all of us dreamt of concluding that our results be statistically significant, that is, characterized by a p-value lying below an arbitrary threshold, most often 5 % ? In this article, we, first, deplore that p has been largely misunderstood, and that its misinterpretation has entailed a fallacious dichotomization and an understatement of the uncertainty prevailing about the effect tested. Next, we introduce and explain a brand-new – direct – measure of the plausibility of the effect under study. Then, we illustrate the relevance of this indicator by revisiting a recently published marketing research case. We also insist on the necessity to contextualize it, using complementary credibility intervals graphically contrasted. Beyond making researchers aware of the exact meaning of test-related probabilities, the delineated approach invites them to formulate their inferences with prudence and modesty acknowledging how uncertain these are.
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
×
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