A P value is conventionally interpreted either as a) the probability by chance of obtaining more extreme results than those observed or b) a tool for declaring significance at a prespecified level. Both approaches carry difficulties: b) does not allow users to make inferences based on the data in hand, and is not rigorously followed by researchers in practice, while (a) is not meaningful as an error rate. Although P values retain an important role, these shortcomings are likely to have contributed significantly to the scientific reproducibility crisis. We introduce the concept of defining long-run frequentist error rates given the observed data, allowing researchers to make accurate and intuitive inferences about the probability of making an error after proposing that the null hypothesis is false. As one approach, we define the false evidence rate (FER) as the probability, under the null hypothesis, of observing a hypothetical future P value providing evidence toward the alternative hypothesis suggested by the observed P value, which we define as a false positive. FERs are much more conservative than their corresponding P values, consistent with studies demonstrating that the latter do not effectively control error rates across the scientific literature. To obtain an FER below 5%, one needs to obtain a P value below approximately [Formula: see text], while a P value of 5% corresponds to an FER of about 25%.
The false evidence rate: An approach to frequentist error rate control conditioning on the observed P value.
错误证据率:一种基于观测 P 值的频率学派错误率控制方法
阅读:6
作者:Crouch, Daniel, J, M
| 期刊: | Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America | 影响因子: | 9.100 |
| 时间: | 2025 | 起止号: | 2025 Jan 14; 122(2):e2415706122 |
| doi: | 10.1073/pnas.2415706122 | ||
特别声明
1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。
2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。
3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。
4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。
