模型平均贝叶斯 t 检验。

IF 3.2 3区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Maximilian Maier, František Bartoš, Daniel S Quintana, Fabian Dablander, Don van den Bergh, Maarten Marsman, Alexander Ly, Eric-Jan Wagenmakers
{"title":"模型平均贝叶斯 t 检验。","authors":"Maximilian Maier, František Bartoš, Daniel S Quintana, Fabian Dablander, Don van den Bergh, Maarten Marsman, Alexander Ly, Eric-Jan Wagenmakers","doi":"10.3758/s13423-024-02590-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>One of the most common statistical analyses in experimental psychology concerns the comparison of two means using the frequentist t test. However, frequentist t tests do not quantify evidence and require various assumption tests. Recently, popularized Bayesian t tests do quantify evidence, but these were developed for scenarios where the two populations are assumed to have the same variance. As an alternative to both methods, we outline a comprehensive t test framework based on Bayesian model averaging. This new t test framework simultaneously takes into account models that assume equal and unequal variances, and models that use t-likelihoods to improve robustness to outliers. The resulting inference is based on a weighted average across the entire model ensemble, with higher weights assigned to models that predicted the observed data well. This new t test framework provides an integrated approach to assumption checks and inference by applying a series of pertinent models to the data simultaneously rather than sequentially. The integrated Bayesian model-averaged t tests achieve robustness without having to commit to a single model following a series of assumption checks. To facilitate practical applications, we provide user-friendly implementations in JASP and via the <math><mi>RoBTT</mi></math> package in <math><mi>R</mi></math> . A tutorial video is available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EcuzGTIcorQ.</p>","PeriodicalId":20763,"journal":{"name":"Psychonomic Bulletin & Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Model-averaged Bayesian t tests.\",\"authors\":\"Maximilian Maier, František Bartoš, Daniel S Quintana, Fabian Dablander, Don van den Bergh, Maarten Marsman, Alexander Ly, Eric-Jan Wagenmakers\",\"doi\":\"10.3758/s13423-024-02590-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>One of the most common statistical analyses in experimental psychology concerns the comparison of two means using the frequentist t test. However, frequentist t tests do not quantify evidence and require various assumption tests. Recently, popularized Bayesian t tests do quantify evidence, but these were developed for scenarios where the two populations are assumed to have the same variance. As an alternative to both methods, we outline a comprehensive t test framework based on Bayesian model averaging. This new t test framework simultaneously takes into account models that assume equal and unequal variances, and models that use t-likelihoods to improve robustness to outliers. The resulting inference is based on a weighted average across the entire model ensemble, with higher weights assigned to models that predicted the observed data well. This new t test framework provides an integrated approach to assumption checks and inference by applying a series of pertinent models to the data simultaneously rather than sequentially. The integrated Bayesian model-averaged t tests achieve robustness without having to commit to a single model following a series of assumption checks. To facilitate practical applications, we provide user-friendly implementations in JASP and via the <math><mi>RoBTT</mi></math> package in <math><mi>R</mi></math> . A tutorial video is available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EcuzGTIcorQ.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20763,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychonomic Bulletin & Review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychonomic Bulletin & Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-024-02590-5\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychonomic Bulletin & Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-024-02590-5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

实验心理学中最常见的统计分析之一是使用频数 t 检验比较两个均值。然而,频数 t 检验不能量化证据,需要进行各种假设检验。最近流行的贝叶斯 t 检验确实可以量化证据,但这些检验是针对假设两个群体具有相同方差的情况而开发的。作为这两种方法的替代方案,我们概述了一个基于贝叶斯模型平均的综合 t 检验框架。这个新的 t 检验框架同时考虑了假设方差相等和不相等的模型,以及使用 t 概率来提高对异常值的稳健性的模型。由此得出的推论基于整个模型集合的加权平均值,对观测数据预测较好的模型赋予较高权重。这种新的 t 检验框架通过对数据同时而不是按顺序应用一系列相关模型,为假设检查和推断提供了一种综合方法。综合贝叶斯模型平均 t 检验具有稳健性,无需在进行一系列假设检查后再对单一模型做出承诺。为了便于实际应用,我们在 JASP 中提供了用户友好的实现方法,并通过 R 中的 RoBTT 软件包提供了实现方法。教程视频请访问 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EcuzGTIcorQ。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Model-averaged Bayesian t tests.

One of the most common statistical analyses in experimental psychology concerns the comparison of two means using the frequentist t test. However, frequentist t tests do not quantify evidence and require various assumption tests. Recently, popularized Bayesian t tests do quantify evidence, but these were developed for scenarios where the two populations are assumed to have the same variance. As an alternative to both methods, we outline a comprehensive t test framework based on Bayesian model averaging. This new t test framework simultaneously takes into account models that assume equal and unequal variances, and models that use t-likelihoods to improve robustness to outliers. The resulting inference is based on a weighted average across the entire model ensemble, with higher weights assigned to models that predicted the observed data well. This new t test framework provides an integrated approach to assumption checks and inference by applying a series of pertinent models to the data simultaneously rather than sequentially. The integrated Bayesian model-averaged t tests achieve robustness without having to commit to a single model following a series of assumption checks. To facilitate practical applications, we provide user-friendly implementations in JASP and via the RoBTT package in R . A tutorial video is available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EcuzGTIcorQ.

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
6.70
自引率
2.90%
发文量
165
期刊介绍: The journal provides coverage spanning a broad spectrum of topics in all areas of experimental psychology. The journal is primarily dedicated to the publication of theory and review articles and brief reports of outstanding experimental work. Areas of coverage include cognitive psychology broadly construed, including but not limited to action, perception, & attention, language, learning & memory, reasoning & decision making, and social cognition. We welcome submissions that approach these issues from a variety of perspectives such as behavioral measurements, comparative psychology, development, evolutionary psychology, genetics, neuroscience, and quantitative/computational modeling. We particularly encourage integrative research that crosses traditional content and methodological boundaries.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信