García-Pérez Miguel A
Facultad de Psicología, Departamento de Metodología, Universidad Complutense Madrid, Spain.
Front Psychol. 2012 Aug 29;3:325. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00325. eCollection 2012.
The ultimate goal of research is to produce dependable knowledge or to provide the evidence that may guide practical decisions. Statistical conclusion validity (SCV) holds when the conclusions of a research study are founded on an adequate analysis of the data, generally meaning that adequate statistical methods are used whose small-sample behavior is accurate, besides being logically capable of providing an answer to the research question. Compared to the three other traditional aspects of research validity (external validity, internal validity, and construct validity), interest in SCV has recently grown on evidence that inadequate data analyses are sometimes carried out which yield conclusions that a proper analysis of the data would not have supported. This paper discusses evidence of three common threats to SCV that arise from widespread recommendations or practices in data analysis, namely, the use of repeated testing and optional stopping without control of Type-I error rates, the recommendation to check the assumptions of statistical tests, and the use of regression whenever a bivariate relation or the equivalence between two variables is studied. For each of these threats, examples are presented and alternative practices that safeguard SCV are discussed. Educational and editorial changes that may improve the SCV of published research are also discussed.
研究的最终目标是产生可靠的知识或提供可指导实际决策的证据。当一项研究的结论基于对数据的充分分析时,统计结论效度(SCV)成立,这通常意味着使用了充分的统计方法,这些方法的小样本行为是准确的,并且在逻辑上能够为研究问题提供答案。与研究效度的其他三个传统方面(外部效度、内部效度和结构效度)相比,最近对SCV的关注有所增加,因为有证据表明有时会进行不充分的数据分析,从而得出正确分析数据不会支持的结论。本文讨论了数据分析中广泛的建议或实践所产生的对SCV的三种常见威胁的证据,即使用重复检验和在不控制I型错误率的情况下进行选择性停止、检查统计检验假设的建议以及在研究双变量关系或两个变量之间的等价性时使用回归。针对这些威胁中的每一种,都给出了示例并讨论了保障SCV的替代做法。还讨论了可能提高已发表研究的SCV的教育和编辑方面的变化。