Rubin, Mark (2024) Type I Error Rates are Not Usually Inflated. [Preprint]
There is a more recent version of this item available. |
|
Text
Rubin (2024) - Type I Error Rates are Not Usually Inflated.pdf Download (360kB) | Preview |
|
Other (Plain Text Bibliography)
bibliography.txt - Bibliography Download (21kB) |
Abstract
The inflation of Type I error rates is thought to be one of the causes of the replication crisis. Questionable research practices such as p-hacking are thought to inflate Type I error rates above their nominal level, leading to unexpectedly high levels of false positives in the literature and, consequently, unexpectedly low replication rates. In this article, I offer an alternative view. I argue that questionable and other research practices do not usually inflate relevant Type I error rates. I begin with an introduction to Type I error rates that distinguishes them from theoretical errors. I then illustrate my argument with respect to model misspecification, multiple testing, selective inference, forking paths, exploratory analyses, p-hacking, optional stopping, double dipping, and HARKing. In each case, I demonstrate that relevant Type I error rates are not usually inflated above their nominal level, and in the rare cases that they are, the inflation is easily identified and resolved. I conclude that the replication crisis may be explained, at least in part, by researchers’ misinterpretation of statistical errors and their underestimation of theoretical errors.
Export/Citation: | EndNote | BibTeX | Dublin Core | ASCII/Text Citation (Chicago) | HTML Citation | OpenURL |
Social Networking: |
Item Type: | Preprint | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Creators: |
|
||||||
Keywords: | exploratory analyses; false positives; forking paths; HARKing; model misspecification; multiple comparisons; multiple testing; optional stopping; p-hacking; questionable research practices; replication crisis; selective inference; significance testing; statistical inference; Type I error inflation; Type I error rate inflation; Type I error rates | ||||||
Subjects: | General Issues > Data General Issues > Evidence General Issues > Explanation General Issues > Models and Idealization Specific Sciences > Probability/Statistics Specific Sciences > Psychology |
||||||
Depositing User: | Dr Mark Rubin | ||||||
Date Deposited: | 05 Jan 2024 03:06 | ||||||
Last Modified: | 05 Jan 2024 03:06 | ||||||
Item ID: | 22908 | ||||||
Official URL: | https://doi.org/10.31222/osf.io/3kv2b | ||||||
DOI or Unique Handle: | 10.31222/osf.io/3kv2b | ||||||
Subjects: | General Issues > Data General Issues > Evidence General Issues > Explanation General Issues > Models and Idealization Specific Sciences > Probability/Statistics Specific Sciences > Psychology |
||||||
Date: | 3 January 2024 | ||||||
URI: | https://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/id/eprint/22908 |
Available Versions of this Item
-
Type I error rates are not usually inflated. (deposited 15 Dec 2023 03:03)
- Type I Error Rates are Not Usually Inflated. (deposited 05 Jan 2024 03:06) [Currently Displayed]
Monthly Views for the past 3 years
Monthly Downloads for the past 3 years
Plum Analytics
Altmetric.com
Actions (login required)
View Item |