两组间等效性的证据:EAGC的实施和可视化

M. Lindel, D. Berwanger, M. Eggart, P. Lindel, W. Kleiner
{"title":"两组间等效性的证据:EAGC的实施和可视化","authors":"M. Lindel, D. Berwanger, M. Eggart, P. Lindel, W. Kleiner","doi":"10.5771/2747-6073-2021-4-20","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Tests of hypotheses differences are often applied to come to conclusions in the field of physical education research, for example in the context of intervention or evaluation designs. If the result shows no significance, the outcome is comparability of two groups. This procedure, however, opposes the test logic based on the difference hypotheses test and leads to unacceptable interpretations of deviances or misconceptions. Thus, an alternative concept is presented as a viable replacement for the difference hypotheses test. This concept allows for clear evidence of equivalence between two groups according to the right test logic. Generally, the confidence interval inclusion method/TOST (Two One-Sided t-Test) is applied as a valid procedure to generate proof of equivalence of two groups. A fictitious example from research in physical education is selected to introduce the TOST method. First, the theoretical computation approach will be presented. Then, this approach will be applied in a software tool, followed by the application description of the Equivalence And Groups Comparison (EAGC) software.","PeriodicalId":22954,"journal":{"name":"THE SKY-International Journal of Physical Education and Sports Sciences (IJPESS)","volume":"41 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evidence of equivalence between two groups: Implementation and visualization with EAGC\",\"authors\":\"M. Lindel, D. Berwanger, M. Eggart, P. Lindel, W. Kleiner\",\"doi\":\"10.5771/2747-6073-2021-4-20\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Tests of hypotheses differences are often applied to come to conclusions in the field of physical education research, for example in the context of intervention or evaluation designs. If the result shows no significance, the outcome is comparability of two groups. This procedure, however, opposes the test logic based on the difference hypotheses test and leads to unacceptable interpretations of deviances or misconceptions. Thus, an alternative concept is presented as a viable replacement for the difference hypotheses test. This concept allows for clear evidence of equivalence between two groups according to the right test logic. Generally, the confidence interval inclusion method/TOST (Two One-Sided t-Test) is applied as a valid procedure to generate proof of equivalence of two groups. A fictitious example from research in physical education is selected to introduce the TOST method. First, the theoretical computation approach will be presented. Then, this approach will be applied in a software tool, followed by the application description of the Equivalence And Groups Comparison (EAGC) software.\",\"PeriodicalId\":22954,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"THE SKY-International Journal of Physical Education and Sports Sciences (IJPESS)\",\"volume\":\"41 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"THE SKY-International Journal of Physical Education and Sports Sciences (IJPESS)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5771/2747-6073-2021-4-20\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"THE SKY-International Journal of Physical Education and Sports Sciences (IJPESS)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5771/2747-6073-2021-4-20","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在体育研究领域,例如在干预或评估设计的背景下,经常应用假设差异检验来得出结论。若结果无显著性,则结果为两组的可比性。然而,这一过程违背了基于差异假设检验的检验逻辑,并导致对偏差或误解的不可接受的解释。因此,提出了一种替代差异假设检验的可行概念。这个概念允许根据正确的测试逻辑清楚地证明两组之间是等价的。一般采用置信区间纳入法/TOST (Two sided t-Test)作为生成两组等价性证明的有效方法。本文选取体育教学研究中的一个虚拟实例来介绍TOST方法。首先,给出了理论计算方法。然后,将此方法应用于软件工具,随后是等效和组比较(EAGC)软件的应用描述。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evidence of equivalence between two groups: Implementation and visualization with EAGC
Tests of hypotheses differences are often applied to come to conclusions in the field of physical education research, for example in the context of intervention or evaluation designs. If the result shows no significance, the outcome is comparability of two groups. This procedure, however, opposes the test logic based on the difference hypotheses test and leads to unacceptable interpretations of deviances or misconceptions. Thus, an alternative concept is presented as a viable replacement for the difference hypotheses test. This concept allows for clear evidence of equivalence between two groups according to the right test logic. Generally, the confidence interval inclusion method/TOST (Two One-Sided t-Test) is applied as a valid procedure to generate proof of equivalence of two groups. A fictitious example from research in physical education is selected to introduce the TOST method. First, the theoretical computation approach will be presented. Then, this approach will be applied in a software tool, followed by the application description of the Equivalence And Groups Comparison (EAGC) software.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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