Department of Psychology, The Ohio State University.
Department of Psychology, Boston College.
Psychol Methods. 2018 Dec;23(4):635-653. doi: 10.1037/met0000163. Epub 2018 Jan 4.
Current concerns regarding the dependability of psychological findings call for methodological developments to provide additional evidence in support of scientific conclusions. This article highlights the value and importance of two distinct kinds of parameter uncertainty, which are quantified by confidence sets (CSs) and fungible parameter estimates (FPEs; Lee, MacCallum, & Browne, 2017); both provide essential information regarding the defensibility of scientific findings. Using the structural equation model, we introduce a general perturbation framework based on the likelihood function that unifies CSs and FPEs and sheds new light on the conceptual distinctions between them. A targeted illustration is then presented to demonstrate the factors which differentially influence CSs and FPEs, further highlighting their theoretical differences. With 3 empirical examples on initiating a conversation with a stranger (Bagozzi & Warshaw, 1988), posttraumatic growth of caregivers in the context of pediatric palliative care (Cadell et al., 2014), and the direct and indirect effects of spirituality on thriving among youth (Dowling, Gestsdottir, Anderson, von Eye, & Lerner, 2004), we illustrate how CSs and FPEs provide unique information which lead to better informed scientific conclusions. Finally, we discuss the importance of considering information afforded by CSs and FPEs in strengthening the basis of interpreting statistical results in substantive research, conclude with future research directions, and provide example OpenMx code for the computation of CSs and FPEs. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).
当前，人们对心理学研究发现的可靠性表示担忧，这就需要通过方法的发展为支持科学结论提供更多的证据。本文强调了两种不同类型的参数不确定性的价值和重要性，这两种不确定性可以通过置信集（CSs）和可替换参数估计（FPEs）来量化（Lee、MacCallum 和 Browne，2017）；这两种方法都为科学发现的辩护提供了重要信息。本文使用结构方程模型，基于似然函数引入了一种通用的摄动框架，将 CSs 和 FPEs 统一起来，并为它们之间的概念区别提供了新的视角。然后，通过一个有针对性的实例演示，展示了影响 CSs 和 FPEs 的不同因素，进一步强调了它们之间的理论差异。本文通过 3 个实证示例，分别是与陌生人交谈的启动研究（Bagozzi 和 Warshaw，1988）、儿科姑息治疗背景下的照顾者创伤后成长研究（Cadell 等人，2014），以及灵性对青年繁荣的直接和间接影响研究（Dowling、Gestsdottir、Anderson、von Eye 和 Lerner，2004），说明了 CSs 和 FPEs 如何提供独特的信息，从而得出更明智的科学结论。最后，本文讨论了在实质性研究中考虑 CSs 和 FPEs 所提供的信息以加强解释统计结果的基础的重要性，总结了未来的研究方向，并提供了用于计算 CSs 和 FPEs 的 OpenMx 代码示例。（PsycINFO 数据库记录（c）2018 APA，保留所有权利）。
