• 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

智利和意大利学术心理学家对p值的误解

Misconceptions of the p-value among Chilean and Italian Academic Psychologists.

作者信息

Badenes-Ribera Laura, Frias-Navarro Dolores, Iotti Bryan, Bonilla-Campos Amparo, Longobardi Claudio

机构信息

Department of Methodology of the Behavioral Sciences, University of Valencia Valencia, Spain.

Veterinary and Prevention Department, University of Turin Turin, Italy.

出版信息

Front Psychol. 2016 Aug 23;7:1247. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01247. eCollection 2016.

DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01247
PMID:27602007
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4993781/
Abstract

Common misconceptions of p-values are based on certain beliefs and attributions about the significance of the results. Thus, they affect the professionals' decisions and jeopardize the quality of interventions and the accumulation of valid scientific knowledge. We conducted a survey on 164 academic psychologists (134 Italian, 30 Chilean) questioned on this topic. Our findings are consistent with previous research and suggest that some participants do not know how to correctly interpret p-values. The inverse probability fallacy presents the greatest comprehension problems, followed by the replication fallacy. These results highlight the importance of the statistical re-education of researchers. Recommendations for improving statistical cognition are proposed.

摘要

对p值的常见误解基于对结果显著性的某些信念和归因。因此,它们影响专业人员的决策,并危及干预措施的质量和有效科学知识的积累。我们对164名学术心理学家(134名意大利人,30名智利人)就这一主题进行了调查。我们的研究结果与先前的研究一致,表明一些参与者不知道如何正确解释p值。逆概率谬误存在最大的理解问题,其次是重复谬误。这些结果凸显了对研究人员进行统计再教育的重要性。文中还提出了提高统计认知的建议。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4d0e/4993781/3cc2f3044a07/fpsyg-07-01247-g0002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4d0e/4993781/3a2e46721305/fpsyg-07-01247-g0001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4d0e/4993781/3cc2f3044a07/fpsyg-07-01247-g0002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4d0e/4993781/3a2e46721305/fpsyg-07-01247-g0001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4d0e/4993781/3cc2f3044a07/fpsyg-07-01247-g0002.jpg

相似文献

1
Misconceptions of the p-value among Chilean and Italian Academic Psychologists.智利和意大利学术心理学家对p值的误解
Front Psychol. 2016 Aug 23;7:1247. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01247. eCollection 2016.
2
Interpretation of the p value: A national survey study in academic psychologists from Spain.p值解读:一项针对西班牙学术心理学家的全国性调查研究
Psicothema. 2015;27(3):290-5. doi: 10.7334/psicothema2014.283.
3
The Practical Alternative to the Value Is the Correctly Used Value.实用的替代价值是正确使用的价值。
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2021 May;16(3):639-648. doi: 10.1177/1745691620958012. Epub 2021 Feb 9.
4
'Understanding it makes it normal': is it a reasoning fallacy or not?“理解它,它就变得正常了”:这是一种推理谬误吗?
J Eval Clin Pract. 2013 Jun;19(3):524-7. doi: 10.1111/jep.12051.
5
Perceived Statistical Knowledge Level and Self-Reported Statistical Practice Among Academic Psychologists.学术心理学家的统计学知识认知水平与自我报告的统计实践情况
Front Psychol. 2018 Jun 22;9:996. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00996. eCollection 2018.
6
[Interpretation mistakes in statistical methods: their importance and some recommendations].[统计方法中的解释错误:其重要性及一些建议]
Psicothema. 2006 Nov;18(4):848-56.
7
Questionable research practices among italian research psychologists.意大利研究心理学家中的可疑研究行为。
PLoS One. 2017 Mar 15;12(3):e0172792. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0172792. eCollection 2017.
8
Uncovering students' misconceptions by assessment of their written questions.通过评估学生的书面问题来发现他们的误解。
BMC Med Educ. 2016 Aug 24;16(1):221. doi: 10.1186/s12909-016-0739-5.
9
Misconceptions, Misuses, and Misinterpretations of P Values and Significance Testing.对 P 值和显著性检验的误解、误用和曲解。
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2017 Sep 20;99(18):1598-1603. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.16.01314.
10
Recognition and management of delirium among doctors, nurses, physiotherapists, and psychologists: an Italian survey.医生、护士、物理治疗师和心理学家对谵妄的认识和管理:一项意大利调查。
Int Psychogeriatr. 2014 Dec;26(12):2093-102. doi: 10.1017/S1041610214001653. Epub 2014 Aug 19.

引用本文的文献

1
Irrationality in humans and creativity in AI.人类的非理性与人工智能的创造力。
Front Artif Intell. 2025 Jun 20;8:1579704. doi: 10.3389/frai.2025.1579704. eCollection 2025.
2
Publication bias in the social sciences since 1959: Application of a regression discontinuity framework.1959年以来社会科学领域的发表性偏倚:回归间断框架的应用
PLoS One. 2025 Feb 14;20(2):e0305666. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0305666. eCollection 2025.
3
Revisiting the left ear advantage for phonetic cues to talker identification.重新审视左耳在语音线索识别说话者方面的优势。

本文引用的文献

1
Interpreting confidence intervals: A comment on Hoekstra, Morey, Rouder, and Wagenmakers (2014).解读置信区间:对霍克斯特拉、莫雷、鲁德和瓦根梅克斯(2014年)的评论
Psychon Bull Rev. 2016 Feb;23(1):124-30. doi: 10.3758/s13423-015-0859-7.
2
Interpretation of the p value: A national survey study in academic psychologists from Spain.p值解读:一项针对西班牙学术心理学家的全国性调查研究
Psicothema. 2015;27(3):290-5. doi: 10.7334/psicothema2014.283.
3
The Alleged Crisis and the Illusion of Exact Replication.所谓的危机与精确复制的幻象。
J Acoust Soc Am. 2022 Nov;152(5):3107. doi: 10.1121/10.0015093.
4
Is the p-value properly interpreted by critical care professionals? Online survey.重症监护专业人员是否正确解读了 P 值?在线调查。
Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2021 Jan-Mar;33(1):88-95. doi: 10.5935/0103-507X.20210009.
5
Perceived Statistical Knowledge Level and Self-Reported Statistical Practice Among Academic Psychologists.学术心理学家的统计学知识认知水平与自我报告的统计实践情况
Front Psychol. 2018 Jun 22;9:996. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00996. eCollection 2018.
6
-Value, Confidence Intervals, and Statistical Inference: A New Dataset of Misinterpretation.- 数值、置信区间与统计推断:一个关于误解的新数据集。
Front Psychol. 2018 Jun 8;9:868. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00868. eCollection 2018.
7
The earth is flat ( > 0.05): significance thresholds and the crisis of unreplicable research.地球是平的(p>0.05):显著性阈值与不可重复研究的危机。
PeerJ. 2017 Jul 7;5:e3544. doi: 10.7717/peerj.3544. eCollection 2017.
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2014 Jan;9(1):59-71. doi: 10.1177/1745691613514450.
4
Replication and p Intervals: p Values Predict the Future Only Vaguely, but Confidence Intervals Do Much Better.复制和 p 值区间:p 值只能模糊地预测未来,但置信区间要好得多。
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2008 Jul;3(4):286-300. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-6924.2008.00079.x.
5
Replication, falsification, and the crisis of confidence in social psychology.复制、证伪与社会心理学中的信任危机。
Front Psychol. 2015 May 19;6:621. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00621. eCollection 2015.
6
Fisher, Neyman-Pearson or NHST? A tutorial for teaching data testing.费歇尔、奈曼-皮尔逊还是 NHST?数据测试教学的教程。
Front Psychol. 2015 Mar 3;6:223. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00223. eCollection 2015.
7
Robust misinterpretation of confidence intervals.对置信区间的严重误解。
Psychon Bull Rev. 2014 Oct;21(5):1157-64. doi: 10.3758/s13423-013-0572-3.
8
Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: a practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs.计算并报告效应量以促进累积科学:t检验和方差分析实用入门指南
Front Psychol. 2013 Nov 26;4:863. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00863.
9
Significance, truth and proof of p values: reminders about common misconceptions regarding null hypothesis significance testing.P值的意义、真实性与证明:关于零假设显著性检验常见误解的提醒
Qual Life Res. 2014 Feb;23(1):5-7. doi: 10.1007/s11136-013-0437-2. Epub 2013 May 23.
10
Effect size estimates: current use, calculations, and interpretation.效应量估计:当前使用、计算和解释。
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2012 Feb;141(1):2-18. doi: 10.1037/a0024338. Epub 2011 Aug 8.