Combating the scientific decline effect with confidence (intervals)
Abstract
A symptom of the need for greater reproducibility in scientific practice is the \"decline effect,\" the fact that the size of many experimental effects decline with subsequent study or fail to replicate entirely. A simple way to combat this problem is for scientists to more routinely use confidence intervals (CIs) in their work. CIs provide frequentist bounds on the true size of an effect and can reveal when a statistically significant effect is possibly too small to be reliable or when a large effect might have been missed due to insufficient statistical power. CIs are often lacking in psychophysiological reports, likely due to the large number of dependent variables, which complicates deriving and visualizing CIs. In this article, I explain the value of CIs and show how to compute them for analyses involving multiple variables in various ways that adjust the intervals for the greater uncertainty induced by multiple statistical comparisons. The methods are illustrated using a basic visual oddball event-related potential (ERP) dataset and freely available Matlab software.
02 /Specification & Classification
Click any tag to browse matching papers- Assay
- 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
- P-values and confidence intervals: not fit for purpose?
Paul D.P. Pharoah, Michelle R. Jones, Siddartha Kar·bioRxiv·Aug 24, 2017
- Hypothesis-testing Improves the Predicted Reliability of Neuroscience Research
Bradley E. Alger·bioRxiv·Feb 4, 2019
- Empirical assessment of published effect sizes and power in the recent cognitive neuroscience and psychology literature
Denes Szucs, John PA Ioannidis·bioRxiv·Aug 25, 2016
- Is the Statistic Value All We Should Care about in Neuroimaging?
Gang Chen, Paul A Taylor, Robert W Cox·NeuroImagePeer-reviewed·Feb 1, 2017
- When null hypothesis significance testing is unsuitable for research: a reassessment
Dénes Szűcs, John P. A. Ioannidis·Frontiers in Human NeurosciencePeer-reviewed·Aug 2, 2017
- What difference do retractions make? An estimate of the epistemic impact of retractions on recent meta-analyses.
D. Fanelli, D. Moher·bioRxiv·Aug 13, 2019