Cribbie Robert A, Gruman Jamie A, Arpin-Cribbie Chantal A
Department of Psychology, York University, Toronto, ON, Canada.
J Clin Psychol. 2004 Jan;60(1):1-10. doi: 10.1002/jclp.10217.
Researchers in psychology reliably select traditional null hypothesis significance tests (e.g., Student's t test), regardless of whether the research hypothesis relates to whether the group means are equivalent or whether the group means are different. Tests of equivalence, which have been popular in biopharmaceutical studies for years, have recently been introduced and recommended to researchers in psychology for demonstrating the equivalence of two group means. However, very few recommendations exist for applying tests of equivalence. A Monte Carlo study was used to compare the test of equivalence proposed by Schuirmann with the traditional Student t test for deciding if two group means are equivalent. It was found that Schuirmann's test of equivalence is more effective than Student's t test at detecting population mean equivalence with large sample sizes; however, Schuirmann's test of equivalence performs poorly relative to Student's t test with small sample sizes and/or inflated variances.
心理学领域的研究人员通常会选择传统的零假设显著性检验(例如学生t检验),无论研究假设是关于组均值是否相等,还是组均值是否不同。等效性检验在生物制药研究中已经流行多年,最近被引入并推荐给心理学领域的研究人员,用于证明两组均值的等效性。然而,关于应用等效性检验的建议却非常少。一项蒙特卡洛研究被用来比较舒尔曼提出的等效性检验与传统的学生t检验,以确定两组均值是否等效。研究发现,在大样本量的情况下,舒尔曼的等效性检验在检测总体均值等效性方面比学生t检验更有效;然而,在小样本量和/或方差膨胀的情况下,舒尔曼的等效性检验相对于学生t检验表现较差。