28
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Bayes factor design analysis: Planning for compelling evidence

      ,
      Psychonomic Bulletin & Review
      Springer Nature

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          A sizeable literature exists on the use of frequentist power analysis in the null-hypothesis significance testing (NHST) paradigm to facilitate the design of informative experiments. In contrast, there is almost no literature that discusses the design of experiments when Bayes factors (BFs) are used as a measure of evidence. Here we explore Bayes Factor Design Analysis (BFDA) as a useful tool to design studies for maximum efficiency and informativeness. We elaborate on three possible BF designs, (a) a fixed-n design, (b) an open-ended Sequential Bayes Factor (SBF) design, where researchers can test after each participant and can stop data collection whenever there is strong evidence for either [Formula: see text] or [Formula: see text], and (c) a modified SBF design that defines a maximal sample size where data collection is stopped regardless of the current state of evidence. We demonstrate how the properties of each design (i.e., expected strength of evidence, expected sample size, expected probability of misleading evidence, expected probability of weak evidence) can be evaluated using Monte Carlo simulations and equip researchers with the necessary information to compute their own Bayesian design analyses.

          Related collections

          Most cited references43

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Strong Inference: Certain systematic methods of scientific thinking may produce much more rapid progress than others.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Bayesian Versus Orthodox Statistics: Which Side Are You On?

            Researchers are often confused about what can be inferred from significance tests. One problem occurs when people apply Bayesian intuitions to significance testing-two approaches that must be firmly separated. This article presents some common situations in which the approaches come to different conclusions; you can see where your intuitions initially lie. The situations include multiple testing, deciding when to stop running participants, and when a theory was thought of relative to finding out results. The interpretation of nonsignificant results has also been persistently problematic in a way that Bayesian inference can clarify. The Bayesian and orthodox approaches are placed in the context of different notions of rationality, and I accuse myself and others as having been irrational in the way we have been using statistics on a key notion of rationality. The reader is shown how to apply Bayesian inference in practice, using free online software, to allow more coherent inferences from data.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Sequential Tests of Statistical Hypotheses

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Psychonomic Bulletin & Review
                Psychon Bull Rev
                Springer Nature
                1069-9384
                1531-5320
                March 2017
                :
                :
                Article
                10.3758/s13423-017-1230-y
                28251595
                23ec61d5-3e8a-42ed-aedf-134b40adad2c
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article