The use of p-values in applied research: Interpretation and new trends
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1973-2201/6439Keywords:
p-value, Neyman-Pearson, Bayes factor, odds ratio, p-hackingAbstract
In this paper we consider a controversy on the use and interpretation of p-values in applied research. In recent years several applied and theoretical journals have started to discuss on the appropriate use of p-values in research fields such as Psychology, Ecology, and Medicine. First, the notion of p-value has some intrinsic limitations, which have been already highlighted in the statistical literature, but are far from being recognized in applied research. Second, it has emerged the so-called practice of p-hacking, which consists in analyzing and re-analyzing data until obtaining a significant result in terms of a p-value less than 0.05. In the light of these problems, we review two alternative theoretical frameworks, given by the use of Bayes factor and a recent proposal that leads to evaluate statistical hypotheses in terms of a priori and a posteriori odds ratios.References
M. BAYARRI, D. J. BENJAMIN, J. O. BERGER, T. M. SELLKE (2016). Rejection odds and rejection ratios: A proposal for statistical practice in testing hypotheses. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 72, pp. 90-103.
M. BAYARRI, J. O. BERGER (1999). Quantifying surprise in the data and model verification. Bayesian Statistics, 6, pp. 53-82.
D. BENJAMIN, J. BERGER (2016). A simple alternative to p-values. The American Statistician, Online supplement, 70.
Y. BENJAMINI (2016). It's not the p-values fault. The American Statistician, Online supplement, 70.
K. S. BUTTON, J. P. IOANNIDIS, C. MOKRYSZ, B. A. NOSEK, J. FLINT, E. S. ROBINSON, M. R. MUNAFÒ (2013). Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 14, pp. 365-376.
J. COHEN (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
D. COLQUHOUN (2014). An investigation of the false discovery rate and the misinterpretation of p-values. Royal Society Open Science, 1, pp. 1-16.
G. Cumming (2013). The new statistics why and how. Psychological Science, 25, pp. 7-29.
S. GOODMAN (2008). A dirty dozen: twelve p-value misconceptions. Seminars in Hematology, 45, pp. 135-140.
S. GOODMAN (2016). The next questions: Who, what, when, where and why? The American Statistician, Online supplement, 70.
S. N. GOODMAN (1999). Toward evidence-based medical statistics. 2: The Bayes factor. Annals of Internal Medicine, 130, pp. 1005-1013.
S. N. GOODMAN (2001). Of p-values and bayes: a modest proposal. Epidemiology, 12, pp. 295-297.
S. GREENLAND, S. J. SENN, K. J. ROTHMAN, J. B. CARLIN, C. POOLE, S. N. GOODMAN, D. G. ALTMAN (2016). Statistical tests, p values, confidence intervals, and power: a guide to misinterpretations. European Journal of Epidemiology, 31, pp. 1-14.
J. P. IOANNIDIS (2014). Discussion: why an estimate of the science-wise false discovery rate and application to the top medical literature" is false. Biostatistics, 15, pp. 28-36.
V. JOHNSON (2016). Comments on the ASA statement on statistical significance and p-values and marginally significant p-values. The American Statistician, Online supplement, 70.
H. J. MOTULSKY (2015). Common misconceptions about data analysis and statistics. British Journal of Pharmacology, 172, pp. 2126-2132.
P. A. MURTAUGH (2014). In defense of p-values. Ecology, 95, pp. 611-617.
T. SELLKE, M. BAYARRI, J. O. BERGER (2001). Calibration of values for testing precise null hypotheses. The American Statistician, 55, pp. 62-71.
D. TRAFIMOW, M. MARKS (2015). Editorial. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 37, pp. 1-2.
D. TRAFIMOW, M. MARKS (2016). Editorial. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 38, pp. 1-2.
B. VIDGEN, T. YASSERI (2016). P-values: misunderstood and misused. pre-print Cornell University.
R. L. WASSERSTEIN, N. A. LAZAR (2016). The ASA's statement on p-values: context, process, and purpose. The American Statistician, 70, pp. 129-133.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2016 Statistica
Copyrights and publishing rights of all the texts on this journal belong to the respective authors without restrictions.
This journal is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (full legal code).
See also our Open Access Policy.
