Evidence for the null hypothesis in functional magnetic resonance imaging using group-level Bayesian inference
Ruslan S. MasharipoviD, Irina KnyazevaiD, Yaroslav Nikolaev, Alexander D. KorotkoviD, Michael Didur, Denis V. CherednichenkoiD, Maxim V. KireeviD
Abstract
Classical null hypothesis significance testing is limited to the rejection of the point-null hypothesis; it does not allow the interpretation of non-significant results. Moreover, studies with a sufficiently large sample size will find statistically significant results even when the effect is negligible and may be considered practically equivalent to the null effect. This leads to a publication bias against the null hypothesis. There are two main approaches to assess null effects: shifting from the point-null to the interval-null hypothesis and considering the practical significance in the frequentist approach; using the Bayesian parameter inference based on posterior probabilities, or the Bayesian model inference based on Bayes factors. Herein, we discuss these statistical methods with particular focus on the application of the Bayesian parameter inference, as it is conceptually connected to both frequentist and Bayesian model inferences. Although Bayesian methods have been theoretically elaborated and implemented in commonly used neuroimaging software, they are not widely used for null effect assessment. To demonstrate the advantages of using the Bayesian parameter inference, we compared it with classical null hypothesis significance testing for fMRI data group analysis. We also consider the problem of choosing a threshold for a practically significant effect and discuss possible applications of Bayesian parameter inference in fMRI studies. We argue that Bayesian inference, which directly provides evidence for both the null and alternative hypotheses, may be more intuitive and convenient for practical use than frequentist inference, which only provides evidence against the null hypothesis. Moreover, it may indicate that the obtained data are not sufficient to make a confident inference. Because interim analysis is easy to perform using Bayesian inference, one can evaluate the data as the sample size increases and decide to terminate the experiment if the obtained data are sufficient to make a confident inference. To facilitate the application of the Bayesian parameter inference to null effect assessment, scripts with a simple GUI were developed.
02 /Specification & Classification
Click any tag to browse matching papers- Citations
- 11
- FWCI
- 1.31
- Field percentile
- top 17%
- Research Focus
- Approach
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.
Related papers
- Practical Bayesian Inference in Neuroscience: Or How I Learned To Stop Worrying and Embrace the Distribution
Brandon S. Coventry, Edward L. Bartlett·eNeuroPeer-reviewed·Jun 25, 2024
- Brain-Wide Inferiority and Equivalence Tests in fMRI Group Analyses: Selected Applications
Martin Fungisai Gerchen, Peter Kirsch, Gordon B. Feld·Human Brain MappingPeer-reviewed·Sep 16, 2021
- An Implementation of Empirical Bayesian Inference and Non-Null Bootstrapping for Threshold Selection and Power Estimation in Multiple and Single Statistical Testing
Bahman Nasseroleslami·bioRxiv·Jul 26, 2019
- An empirically-driven guide on using Bayes Factors for M/EEG decoding
Lina Teichmann, Denise Moerel, … Tijl Grootswagers·Aperture NeuroPeer-reviewed·Mar 28, 2022
- Bayes Estimate of Primary Threshold in Cluster-wise fMRI Inferences
Yunjiang Ge, Stephanie Hare, … Shuo Chen·bioRxiv·Oct 3, 2020
- Implementation of Bayesian Multiple Comparison Correction in the Second-Level Analysis of fMRI Data: With Pilot Analyses of Simulation and Real fMRI Datasets Based on Voxelwise Inference
Hyemin Han·Cognitive NeurosciencePeer-reviewed·Dec 19, 2019