Improving Inferences About Null Effects With Bayes Factors and Equivalence Tests.


Journal

The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences
ISSN: 1758-5368
Titre abrégé: J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9508483

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
01 01 2020
Historique:
received: 26 02 2018
pubmed: 8 6 2018
medline: 14 8 2020
entrez: 8 6 2018
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Researchers often conclude an effect is absent when a null-hypothesis significance test yields a nonsignificant p value. However, it is neither logically nor statistically correct to conclude an effect is absent when a hypothesis test is not significant. We present two methods to evaluate the presence or absence of effects: Equivalence testing (based on frequentist statistics) and Bayes factors (based on Bayesian statistics). In four examples from the gerontology literature, we illustrate different ways to specify alternative models that can be used to reject the presence of a meaningful or predicted effect in hypothesis tests. We provide detailed explanations of how to calculate, report, and interpret Bayes factors and equivalence tests. We also discuss how to design informative studies that can provide support for a null model or for the absence of a meaningful effect. The conceptual differences between Bayes factors and equivalence tests are discussed, and we also note when and why they might lead to similar or different inferences in practice. It is important that researchers are able to falsify predictions or can quantify the support for predicted null effects. Bayes factors and equivalence tests provide useful statistical tools to improve inferences about null effects.

Identifiants

pubmed: 29878211
pii: 5033832
doi: 10.1093/geronb/gby065
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

45-57

Informations de copyright

© The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Gerontological Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Auteurs

Daniël Lakens (D)

Department of Human-Technology Interaction, Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands.

Neil McLatchie (N)

Department of Psychology, Lancaster University, UK.

Peder M Isager (PM)

Department of Human-Technology Interaction, Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands.

Anne M Scheel (AM)

Department of Human-Technology Interaction, Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands.

Zoltan Dienes (Z)

School of Psychology, Sussex University, Brighton, UK.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH