从参数统计到非参数统计在教育和农业教育研究中的应用

IF 2.9 4区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
J. Silva-Lugo, L. Warner, Sebastian Galindo
{"title":"从参数统计到非参数统计在教育和农业教育研究中的应用","authors":"J. Silva-Lugo, L. Warner, Sebastian Galindo","doi":"10.1080/1389224X.2021.1936089","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Purpose A literature research conducted in education and agricultural education journals published during a period of 10 years revealed that 98% of the studies used parametric analyses. In general, model assumptions were not tested, and statistical criteria were not followed to apply the parametric approach. The objective of this paper is to persuade researchers to use the most appropriate statistical analysis for their data. Design/Methodology/approach We present a case study in agricultural education where a parametric multiple linear regression (MLR) could be applied. A survey was designed to find out how Theory of Planned Behavior and Importance-Performance variables were associated to Behavioral Intent concerning landscape water conservation practices. Although model assumptions were not met, we initially carried out a MLR analysis based on the premise that the results could be reported descriptively if they were double cross-validated successfully. Findings The double cross-validation of the MLR was not successful, and model assumptions were not held even though the sample size was large. A quantile regression (QR) model fitted the data well. Theory of Planned Behavior and Importance-Performance variables were good predictors of Behavioral Intent, excepting Attitude. Practical implications Researchers must rely on statistical criteria to support decisions regarding the use of parametric or non-parametric procedures. Theoretical implications The adherence to best practices in the utilization of statistical procedures must be discussed as an ethical matter in research across all fields of science. Originality/value We demonstrate that imposing the Central Limit Theorem to use the MLR model is not the correct criterion to apply a parametric approach. We should use double cross-validation. GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT","PeriodicalId":46772,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agricultural Education & Extension","volume":"28 1","pages":"393 - 413"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/1389224X.2021.1936089","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"From parametric to non-parametric statistics in education and agricultural education research\",\"authors\":\"J. Silva-Lugo, L. Warner, Sebastian Galindo\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/1389224X.2021.1936089\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Purpose A literature research conducted in education and agricultural education journals published during a period of 10 years revealed that 98% of the studies used parametric analyses. In general, model assumptions were not tested, and statistical criteria were not followed to apply the parametric approach. The objective of this paper is to persuade researchers to use the most appropriate statistical analysis for their data. Design/Methodology/approach We present a case study in agricultural education where a parametric multiple linear regression (MLR) could be applied. A survey was designed to find out how Theory of Planned Behavior and Importance-Performance variables were associated to Behavioral Intent concerning landscape water conservation practices. Although model assumptions were not met, we initially carried out a MLR analysis based on the premise that the results could be reported descriptively if they were double cross-validated successfully. Findings The double cross-validation of the MLR was not successful, and model assumptions were not held even though the sample size was large. A quantile regression (QR) model fitted the data well. Theory of Planned Behavior and Importance-Performance variables were good predictors of Behavioral Intent, excepting Attitude. Practical implications Researchers must rely on statistical criteria to support decisions regarding the use of parametric or non-parametric procedures. Theoretical implications The adherence to best practices in the utilization of statistical procedures must be discussed as an ethical matter in research across all fields of science. Originality/value We demonstrate that imposing the Central Limit Theorem to use the MLR model is not the correct criterion to apply a parametric approach. We should use double cross-validation. GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT\",\"PeriodicalId\":46772,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Agricultural Education & Extension\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"393 - 413\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/1389224X.2021.1936089\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Agricultural Education & Extension\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/1389224X.2021.1936089\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Agricultural Education & Extension","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1389224X.2021.1936089","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

摘要目的对10年间出版的教育和农业教育期刊进行的文献研究发现,98%的研究使用了参数分析。一般来说,没有检验模型假设,也没有遵循统计准则来应用参数方法。本文的目的是说服研究人员对他们的数据使用最合适的统计分析。设计/方法/方法我们提出了一个农业教育的案例研究,其中参数多元线性回归(MLR)可以应用。本研究旨在探讨计划行为理论与重要绩效变量对景观节水实践行为意图的影响。虽然模型假设不满足,但我们最初基于这样一个前提进行了MLR分析,即如果成功地进行了双重交叉验证,结果就可以被描述地报告。结果MLR的双重交叉验证不成功,即使样本量很大,模型假设也不成立。分位数回归(QR)模型对数据拟合良好。除态度外,计划行为理论和重要绩效变量是行为意图的良好预测因子。实际意义研究人员必须依靠统计标准来支持关于使用参数或非参数程序的决策。在所有科学领域的研究中,坚持使用统计程序的最佳实践必须作为一个伦理问题加以讨论。我们证明,将中心极限定理强加于MLR模型并不是应用参数方法的正确准则。我们应该使用双重交叉验证。图形抽象
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
From parametric to non-parametric statistics in education and agricultural education research
ABSTRACT Purpose A literature research conducted in education and agricultural education journals published during a period of 10 years revealed that 98% of the studies used parametric analyses. In general, model assumptions were not tested, and statistical criteria were not followed to apply the parametric approach. The objective of this paper is to persuade researchers to use the most appropriate statistical analysis for their data. Design/Methodology/approach We present a case study in agricultural education where a parametric multiple linear regression (MLR) could be applied. A survey was designed to find out how Theory of Planned Behavior and Importance-Performance variables were associated to Behavioral Intent concerning landscape water conservation practices. Although model assumptions were not met, we initially carried out a MLR analysis based on the premise that the results could be reported descriptively if they were double cross-validated successfully. Findings The double cross-validation of the MLR was not successful, and model assumptions were not held even though the sample size was large. A quantile regression (QR) model fitted the data well. Theory of Planned Behavior and Importance-Performance variables were good predictors of Behavioral Intent, excepting Attitude. Practical implications Researchers must rely on statistical criteria to support decisions regarding the use of parametric or non-parametric procedures. Theoretical implications The adherence to best practices in the utilization of statistical procedures must be discussed as an ethical matter in research across all fields of science. Originality/value We demonstrate that imposing the Central Limit Theorem to use the MLR model is not the correct criterion to apply a parametric approach. We should use double cross-validation. GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT
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
5.00
自引率
28.60%
发文量
30
期刊介绍: The Journal of Agricultural Education & Extension is published to inform experts who do or use research on agricultural education and extension about research conducted in this field worldwide. Information about this research is needed to improve policies, strategies, methods and practices for agricultural education and extension. The Journal of Agricultural Education & Extension accepts authorative and well-referenced scientific articles within the field of agricultural education and extension after a double-blind peer review process. Agricultural education and extension faces profound change, and therefore its core area of attention is moving towards communication, competence development and performance improvement for a wide variety of fields and audiences, most of which can be studied from a multi-disciplinary perspective, including: -Communication for Development- Competence Management and Development- Corporate Social Responsibility and Human Resource Development- Design and Implementation of Competence–based Education- Environmental and Natural Resource Management- Entrepreneurship and Learning- Facilitating Multiple-Stakeholder Processes- Health and Society- Innovation of Agricultural-Technical Education- Innovation Systems and Learning- Integrated Rural Development- Interdisciplinary and Social Learning- Learning, Conflict and Decision Making- Poverty Reduction- Performance Improvement- Sustainable Agricultural Production
×
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