• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

心理学中小于0.05的p值分布:究竟是怎么回事?

Distributions of p-values smaller than .05 in psychology: what is going on?

作者信息

Hartgerink Chris H J, van Aert Robbie C M, Nuijten Michèle B, Wicherts Jelte M, van Assen Marcel A L M

机构信息

Department of Methodology and Statistics, Tilburg University , Tilburg , The Netherlands.

Department of Methodology and Statistics, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands; Department of Sociology, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

出版信息

PeerJ. 2016 Apr 11;4:e1935. doi: 10.7717/peerj.1935. eCollection 2016.

DOI:10.7717/peerj.1935
PMID:27077017
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4830257/
Abstract

Previous studies provided mixed findings on pecularities in p-value distributions in psychology. This paper examined 258,050 test results across 30,710 articles from eight high impact journals to investigate the existence of a peculiar prevalence of p-values just below .05 (i.e., a bump) in the psychological literature, and a potential increase thereof over time. We indeed found evidence for a bump just below .05 in the distribution of exactly reported p-values in the journals Developmental Psychology, Journal of Applied Psychology, and Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, but the bump did not increase over the years and disappeared when using recalculated p-values. We found clear and direct evidence for the QRP "incorrect rounding of p-value" (John, Loewenstein & Prelec, 2012) in all psychology journals. Finally, we also investigated monotonic excess of p-values, an effect of certain QRPs that has been neglected in previous research, and developed two measures to detect this by modeling the distributions of statistically significant p-values. Using simulations and applying the two measures to the retrieved test results, we argue that, although one of the measures suggests the use of QRPs in psychology, it is difficult to draw general conclusions concerning QRPs based on modeling of p-value distributions.

摘要

以往的研究对心理学中p值分布的特殊性给出了不一致的结果。本文检查了来自八本高影响力期刊的30710篇文章中的258050个测试结果,以调查心理学文献中是否存在p值刚好低于0.05(即一个凸起)的特殊普遍情况,以及其随时间的潜在增加。我们确实在《发展心理学》《应用心理学杂志》和《人格与社会心理学杂志》中精确报告的p值分布中发现了低于0.05的凸起的证据,但该凸起多年来并未增加,并且在使用重新计算的p值时消失了。我们在所有心理学杂志中都发现了明确直接的证据证明存在“p值的错误舍入”这种可疑研究做法(约翰、洛温斯坦和普雷莱克,2012年)。最后,我们还研究了p值的单调过量,这是一种在以往研究中被忽视的可疑研究做法的影响,并通过对统计显著的p值分布进行建模开发了两种检测方法。通过模拟并将这两种方法应用于检索到的测试结果,我们认为,尽管其中一种方法表明在心理学中存在可疑研究做法,但基于p值分布建模很难得出关于可疑研究做法的一般性结论。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/889a/4830257/6f1bb2dc64ef/peerj-04-1935-g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/889a/4830257/6be282ee533c/peerj-04-1935-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/889a/4830257/82781a238011/peerj-04-1935-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/889a/4830257/cb5fe26a0374/peerj-04-1935-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/889a/4830257/8038165189b8/peerj-04-1935-g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/889a/4830257/6f1bb2dc64ef/peerj-04-1935-g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/889a/4830257/6be282ee533c/peerj-04-1935-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/889a/4830257/82781a238011/peerj-04-1935-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/889a/4830257/cb5fe26a0374/peerj-04-1935-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/889a/4830257/8038165189b8/peerj-04-1935-g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/889a/4830257/6f1bb2dc64ef/peerj-04-1935-g005.jpg

相似文献

1
Distributions of p-values smaller than .05 in psychology: what is going on?心理学中小于0.05的p值分布:究竟是怎么回事?
PeerJ. 2016 Apr 11;4:e1935. doi: 10.7717/peerj.1935. eCollection 2016.
2
Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.在流行地区,服用抗叶酸抗疟药物的人群中,叶酸补充剂与疟疾易感性和严重程度的关系。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1;2(2022):CD014217. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014217.
3
Questionable research practices in student final theses - Prevalence, attitudes, and the role of the supervisor's perceived attitudes.学生毕业论文中的可疑研究行为 - 流行率、态度以及导师感知态度的作用。
PLoS One. 2018 Aug 30;13(8):e0203470. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0203470. eCollection 2018.
4
A peculiar prevalence of p values just below .05.p值略低于0.05的奇特流行情况。
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2012;65(11):2271-9. doi: 10.1080/17470218.2012.711335. Epub 2012 Aug 2.
5
Is something rotten in the state of Denmark? Cross-national evidence for widespread involvement but not systematic use of questionable research practices across all fields of research.丹麦国内是否存在腐败现象?跨国证据表明,所有研究领域都广泛存在但并非系统使用有问题的研究做法。
PLoS One. 2024 Aug 12;19(8):e0304342. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0304342. eCollection 2024.
6
Testing for Questionable Research Practices in a Meta-Analysis: An Example from Experimental Parapsychology.元分析中可疑研究行为的检测:以实验超心理学为例。
PLoS One. 2016 May 4;11(5):e0153049. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0153049. eCollection 2016.
7
Occurrence and nature of questionable research practices in the reporting of messages and conclusions in international scientific Health Services Research publications: a structured assessment of publications authored by researchers in the Netherlands.国际卫生服务研究出版物中报告信息和结论的可疑研究行为的发生情况和性质:对荷兰研究人员撰写的出版物进行的结构化评估。
BMJ Open. 2019 May 15;9(5):e027903. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-027903.
8
Reanalyzing Head et al. (2015): investigating the robustness of widespread -hacking.重新分析黑德等人(2015年)的研究:探究广泛黑客攻击的稳健性。
PeerJ. 2017 Mar 2;5:e3068. doi: 10.7717/peerj.3068. eCollection 2017.
9
The prevalence of statistical reporting errors in psychology (1985-2013).心理学中统计报告错误的发生率(1985 - 2013年)
Behav Res Methods. 2016 Dec;48(4):1205-1226. doi: 10.3758/s13428-015-0664-2.
10
Internal conceptual replications do not increase independent replication success.内部概念性重复并不会提高独立重复的成功率。
Psychon Bull Rev. 2016 Oct;23(5):1631-1638. doi: 10.3758/s13423-016-1030-9.

引用本文的文献

1
Coregistration of EEG and eye-tracking in infants and developing populations.婴儿及发育中人群脑电图与眼动追踪的配准
Atten Percept Psychophys. 2025 Jan;87(1):228-237. doi: 10.3758/s13414-024-02857-y. Epub 2024 Feb 22.
2
Are most published research findings false? Trends in statistical power, publication selection bias, and the false discovery rate in psychology (1975-2017).发表的研究结果多数是错误的吗?心理学中统计功效、发表偏倚和虚报发现率的趋势(1975-2017)。
PLoS One. 2023 Oct 17;18(10):e0292717. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0292717. eCollection 2023.
3
Multimodality matters in numerical communication.

本文引用的文献

1
Reanalyzing Head et al. (2015): investigating the robustness of widespread -hacking.重新分析黑德等人(2015年)的研究:探究广泛黑客攻击的稳健性。
PeerJ. 2017 Mar 2;5:e3068. doi: 10.7717/peerj.3068. eCollection 2017.
2
Problems in using p-curve analysis and text-mining to detect rate of p-hacking and evidential value.使用p曲线分析和文本挖掘来检测p值操纵率和证据价值时存在的问题。
PeerJ. 2016 Feb 18;4:e1715. doi: 10.7717/peerj.1715. eCollection 2016.
3
The distribution of probability values in medical abstracts: an observational study.
多模态在数字通信中很重要。
Front Psychol. 2023 Jul 26;14:1130777. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1130777. eCollection 2023.
4
Tempest in a teacup: An analysis of p-Hacking in organizational research.小题大做:组织研究中 p-值操纵的分析。
PLoS One. 2023 Feb 24;18(2):e0281938. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0281938. eCollection 2023.
5
Big little lies: a compendium and simulation of -hacking strategies.弥天大谎:-黑客攻击策略汇编与模拟
R Soc Open Sci. 2023 Feb 8;10(2):220346. doi: 10.1098/rsos.220346. eCollection 2023 Feb.
6
How do psychology researchers interpret the results of multiple replication studies?心理学研究人员如何解释多项重复研究的结果?
Psychon Bull Rev. 2023 Aug;30(4):1609-1620. doi: 10.3758/s13423-022-02235-5. Epub 2023 Jan 12.
7
Replication concerns in sports and exercise science: a narrative review of selected methodological issues in the field.体育与运动科学中的重复研究问题:对该领域若干选定方法学问题的叙述性综述
R Soc Open Sci. 2022 Dec 14;9(12):220946. doi: 10.1098/rsos.220946. eCollection 2022 Dec.
8
Transparent, Open, and Reproducible Prevention Science.透明、开放、可重现的预防科学。
Prev Sci. 2022 Jul;23(5):701-722. doi: 10.1007/s11121-022-01336-w. Epub 2022 Feb 17.
9
P-hacking in clinical trials and how incentives shape the distribution of results across phases.临床试验中的 P-值操纵以及激励机制如何影响各阶段研究结果的分布。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2020 Jun 16;117(24):13386-13392. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1919906117. Epub 2020 Jun 2.
10
Research practices and statistical reporting quality in 250 economic psychology master's theses: a meta-research investigation.250篇经济心理学硕士论文的研究实践与统计报告质量:一项元研究调查
R Soc Open Sci. 2019 Dec 18;6(12):190738. doi: 10.1098/rsos.190738. eCollection 2019 Dec.
医学摘要中概率值的分布:一项观察性研究。
BMC Res Notes. 2015 Nov 26;8:721. doi: 10.1186/s13104-015-1691-x.
4
Better P-curves: Making P-curve analysis more robust to errors, fraud, and ambitious P-hacking, a Reply to Ulrich and Miller (2015).更好的P曲线:使P曲线分析对错误、欺诈和激进的P值操纵更具稳健性,对乌尔里希和米勒(2015年)的回应
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2015 Dec;144(6):1146-52. doi: 10.1037/xge0000104.
5
p-hacking by post hoc selection with multiple opportunities: Detectability by skewness test?: Comment on Simonsohn, Nelson, and Simmons (2014).通过多次事后选择进行的p值操纵:能否通过偏度检验检测出来?对西蒙松、尼尔森和西蒙斯(2014年)的评论
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2015 Dec;144(6):1137-45. doi: 10.1037/xge0000086.
6
The prevalence of statistical reporting errors in psychology (1985-2013).心理学中统计报告错误的发生率(1985 - 2013年)
Behav Res Methods. 2016 Dec;48(4):1205-1226. doi: 10.3758/s13428-015-0664-2.
7
"Everybody knows psychology is not a real science": Public perceptions of psychology and how we can improve our relationship with policymakers, the scientific community, and the general public.“每个人都知道心理学不是一门真正的科学”:公众对心理学的看法以及我们如何改善与政策制定者、科学界和普通公众的关系。
Am Psychol. 2015 Sep;70(6):527-42. doi: 10.1037/a0039405.
8
On the challenges of drawing conclusions from p-values just below 0.05.关于在 p 值刚刚低于 0.05 时得出结论所面临的挑战。
PeerJ. 2015 Jul 30;3:e1142. doi: 10.7717/peerj.1142. eCollection 2015.
9
An Agenda for Purely Confirmatory Research.纯粹确证性研究议程
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2012 Nov;7(6):632-8. doi: 10.1177/1745691612463078.
10
Editors' Introduction to the Special Section on Replicability in Psychological Science: A Crisis of Confidence?《心理科学中可重复性问题特刊编辑引言:信心危机?》
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2012 Nov;7(6):528-30. doi: 10.1177/1745691612465253.