Improving inferential analyses predata and postdata.

IF 7.6 1区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY

Psychological methods Pub Date : 2024-09-09 DOI:10.1037/met0000697

David Trafimow,Tingting Tong,Tonghui Wang,S T Boris Choy,Liqun Hu,Xiangfei Chen,Cong Wang,Ziyuan Wang

{"title":"Improving inferential analyses predata and postdata.","authors":"David Trafimow,Tingting Tong,Tonghui Wang,S T Boris Choy,Liqun Hu,Xiangfei Chen,Cong Wang,Ziyuan Wang","doi":"10.1037/met0000697","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The standard statistical procedure for researchers comprises a two-step process. Before data collection, researchers perform power analyses, and after data collection, they perform significance tests. Many have proffered arguments that significance tests are unsound, but that issue will not be rehashed here. It is sufficient that even for aficionados, there is the usual disclaimer that null hypothesis significance tests provide extremely limited information, thereby rendering them vulnerable to misuse. There is a much better postdata option that provides a higher grade of useful information. Based on work by Trafimow and his colleagues (for a review, see Trafimow, 2023a), it is possible to estimate probabilities of being better off or worse off, by varying degrees, depending on whether one gets the treatment or not. In turn, if the postdata goal switches from significance testing to a concern with probabilistic advantages or disadvantages, an implication is that the predata goal ought to switch accordingly. The a priori procedure, with its focus on parameter estimation, should replace conventional power analysis as a predata procedure. Therefore, the new two-step procedure should be the a priori procedure predata and estimations of probabilities of being better off, or worse off, to varying degrees, postdata. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).","PeriodicalId":20782,"journal":{"name":"Psychological methods","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":7.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological methods","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000697","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

The standard statistical procedure for researchers comprises a two-step process. Before data collection, researchers perform power analyses, and after data collection, they perform significance tests. Many have proffered arguments that significance tests are unsound, but that issue will not be rehashed here. It is sufficient that even for aficionados, there is the usual disclaimer that null hypothesis significance tests provide extremely limited information, thereby rendering them vulnerable to misuse. There is a much better postdata option that provides a higher grade of useful information. Based on work by Trafimow and his colleagues (for a review, see Trafimow, 2023a), it is possible to estimate probabilities of being better off or worse off, by varying degrees, depending on whether one gets the treatment or not. In turn, if the postdata goal switches from significance testing to a concern with probabilistic advantages or disadvantages, an implication is that the predata goal ought to switch accordingly. The a priori procedure, with its focus on parameter estimation, should replace conventional power analysis as a predata procedure. Therefore, the new two-step procedure should be the a priori procedure predata and estimations of probabilities of being better off, or worse off, to varying degrees, postdata. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

查看原文本刊更多论文

改进推理分析的前数据和后数据。

研究人员的标准统计程序包括两个步骤。在收集数据之前，研究人员会进行功率分析；在收集数据之后，他们会进行显著性检验。很多人都提出了显著性检验不可靠的论点，在此不再赘述。即使对研究爱好者来说，通常也会有这样的免责声明：零假设显著性检验提供的信息极其有限，因此容易被滥用。还有一个更好的后数据选项，可以提供更高级别的有用信息。根据 Trafimow 及其同事的研究（综述见 Trafimow, 2023a），我们可以根据一个人是否接受治疗，估算出不同程度的更好或更差的概率。反过来，如果后数据目标从显著性检验转向对概率优势或劣势的关注，那么就意味着前数据目标也应相应转换。以参数估计为重点的先验程序应取代传统的功率分析，成为数据前程序。因此，新的两步程序应该是先验程序的前数据和对不同程度的更好或更差概率的估计，即后数据。(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。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Psychological methods PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-

CiteScore

13.10

自引率

7.10%

发文量

159

期刊介绍： Psychological Methods is devoted to the development and dissemination of methods for collecting, analyzing, understanding, and interpreting psychological data. Its purpose is the dissemination of innovations in research design, measurement, methodology, and quantitative and qualitative analysis to the psychological community; its further purpose is to promote effective communication about related substantive and methodological issues. The audience is expected to be diverse and to include those who develop new procedures, those who are responsible for undergraduate and graduate training in design, measurement, and statistics, as well as those who employ those procedures in research.

文献相关原料

公司名称	产品信息	采购帮参考价格