.png){kind=icon}
Return
Revised standards for statistical evidence
.png){kind=icon}
OA
AI
DOI：10.1073/pnas.1313476110.png)
.png){kind=icon}
.png){kind=icon}
Share.png){kind=icon}
Save
Abstract
En 中文
Recent advances in Bayesian hypothesis testing have led to the development of uniformly most powerful Bayesian tests, which represent an objective, default class of Bayesian hypothesis tests that have the same rejection regions as classical significance tests. Based on the correspondence between these two classes of tests, it is possible to equate the size of classical hypothesis tests with evidence thresholds in Bayesian tests, and to equate P values with Bayes factors. An examination of these connections suggest that recent concerns over the lack of reproducibility of scientific studies can be attributed largely to the conduct of significance tests at unjustifiably high levels of significance. To correct this problem, evidence thresholds required for the declaration of a significant finding should be increased to 25-50:1, and to 100-200:1 for the declaration of a highly significant finding. In terms of classical hypothesis tests, these evidence standards mandate the conduct of tests at the 0.005 or 0.001 level of significance.
Keywords:
PUBLICATION BIAS
HYPOTHESIS
AI Summary
Key information extracted from the uploaded paper, including a brief overview, abstract, background, key highlights, visual analysis, and future outlook.
Journal
P
IF:
9.1
Papers:
10.8W
Citations:
73.5W
Organization
No organization information available
Cited Papers
Evidence that publication bias contaminated studies relating social class and unethical behaviorOAAI
OAAIShareSaveShareSaveShareSaveThe Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaire: Confirmatory factor analysis and identification of patient subgroups.png)
Pain
PainIF0
PREAI
ShareSave
View more