Schatz Philip, Jay Kristin A, McComb Jason, McLaughlin Jason R
Department of Psychology, Saint Joseph's University, 222 Post Hall, Philadelphia, PA 19131, USA.
Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2005 Dec;20(8):1053-9. doi: 10.1016/j.acn.2005.06.006. Epub 2005 Aug 10.
This article reviews the (mis)use of statistical tests in neuropsychology research studies published in the Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology in the years 1990-1992 and 1996-2000, and 2001-2004, prior to, commensurate with the internet-based and paper-based release, and following the release of the American Psychological Association's Task Force on Statistical Inference. The authors focused on four statistical errors: inappropriate use of null hypothesis tests, inappropriate use of P-values, neglect of effect size, and inflation of Type I error rates. Despite the recommendations of the Task Force on Statistical Inference published in 1999, the present study recorded instances of these statistical errors both pre- and post-APA's report, with only the reporting of effect size increasing after the release of the report. Neuropsychologists involved in empirical research should be better aware of the limitations and boundaries of hypothesis testing as well as the theoretical aspects of research methodology.
本文回顾了1990 - 1992年、1996 - 2000年以及2001 - 2004年发表在《临床神经心理学档案》上的神经心理学研究中统计检验的（误）用情况，这些时间分别在基于互联网和纸质版发布之前、与之对应的时期以及美国心理学会统计推断特别工作组报告发布之后。作者聚焦于四个统计错误：零假设检验的不当使用、P值的不当使用、效应量的忽视以及I型错误率的膨胀。尽管1999年发布了统计推断特别工作组的建议，但本研究记录了这些统计错误在该报告发布前后的实例，报告发布后仅效应量的报告有所增加。参与实证研究的神经心理学家应更好地意识到假设检验的局限性和边界以及研究方法的理论方面。
