Department of Psychology, University of Dayton, Dayton, Ohio, United States of America.
Department of Psychology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
PLoS One. 2024 Jul 11;19(7):e0305193. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0305193. eCollection 2024.
Recent works have called into question whether p-curve can reliably assess the presence of "evidential value" within a set of studies. To examine an as-yet unexplored issue, we examined the method used to identify p-values for inclusion in a p-curve analysis. We developed iterated p-curve analysis (IPA), which calculates and p-curves every permutation for a set of reported p-values, and applied it to the data reported in several published p-curve analyses. Specifically, we investigated two phenomena for which p-curves have been used to evaluate the presence of evidential value: the power pose and the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) reactivity debates. The iterated p-curve analyses revealed that the p-curve method fails to provide reliable estimates or reproducible conclusions. We conclude that p-curve should not be used to make conclusions regarding the presence or absence of evidence for a specific phenomenon.
最近的研究工作对 p 曲线是否能够可靠地评估一组研究中“证据价值”的存在提出了质疑。为了研究一个尚未探讨的问题,我们检查了用于确定纳入 p 曲线分析的 p 值的方法。我们开发了迭代 p 曲线分析(IPA),该分析为一组报告的 p 值的每个排列计算和 p 曲线,并将其应用于几个已发布的 p 曲线分析报告的数据中。具体来说,我们研究了两种现象,p 曲线已被用于评估证据价值的存在:权力姿势和下丘脑-垂体-肾上腺(HPA)反应性辩论。迭代 p 曲线分析表明,p 曲线方法无法提供可靠的估计或可重复的结论。我们得出结论,不应使用 p 曲线来得出关于特定现象是否存在证据的结论。