henhao
Sign in
NeuroscienceCurrent Protocols in Neuroscience
Peer-reviewed journal article

A guide to robust statistical methods in neuroscience

Rand R. WilcoxiD, Guillaume A. RousseletiD

PDFDOIPreprint

Abstract

There is a vast array of new and improved methods for comparing groups and studying associations that offer the potential for substantially increasing power, providing improved control over the probability of a Type I error, and yielding a deeper and more nuanced understanding of neuroscience data. These new techniques effectively deal with four insights into when and why conventional methods can be unsatisfactory. But for the non-statistician, the vast array of new and improved techniques for comparing groups and studying associations can seem daunting, simply because there are so many new methods that are now available. The paper briefly reviews when and why conventional methods can have relatively low power and yield misleading results. The main goal is to suggest some general guidelines regarding when, how and why certain modern techniques might be used.

02 /Specification & Classification

Click any tag to browse matching papers
Citations
111
FWCI
2.39
Field percentile
top 9%

Reproducibility ledger

Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.

Sign in to file a reproducibility report.

Similarity Map
SelectedSame fieldCross-field
THISRousselet '17Nasserolesl '19Alger '19Coventry '24Szűcs '17Chen '17
73% semantic matchNeuroscience
Guillaume A. Rousselet, Cyril R Pernet, Rand R. Wilcox·European Journal of Neuroscience·May 25, 2017· 215 citations