Resumen
p-curve, the distribution of significant p-values, can be analyzed to assess if the findings have evidential value, whether p-hacking and file-drawering can be ruled out as the sole explanations for them. Bruns and Ioannidis (2016) have proposed p-curve cannot examine evidential value with observational data. Their discussion confuses false-positive findings with confounded ones, failing to distinguish correlation from causation. We demonstrate this important distinction by showing that a confounded but real, hence replicable association, gun ownership and number of sexual partners, leads to a right-skewed p-curve, while a false-positive one, respondent ID number and trust in the supreme court, leads to a flat p-curve. P-curve can distinguish between replicable and non-replicable findings. The observational nature of the data is not consequential.
| Idioma original | Inglés |
|---|---|
| Número de artículo | e0213454 |
| Publicación | PLoS ONE |
| Volumen | 14 |
| N.º | 3 |
| DOI | |
| Estado | Publicada - mar 2019 |
| Publicado de forma externa | Sí |
Huella
Profundice en los temas de investigación de 'P-curve won’t do your laundry, but it will distinguish replicable from non-replicable findings in observational research: Comment on Bruns & Ioannidis (2016)'. En conjunto forman una huella única.Cómo citar
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver