The False Positive Risk: A Proposal Concerning What to Do About p-Values
Open Access
- 20 March 2019
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Informa UK Limited in The American Statistician
- Vol. 73 (sup1), 192-201
- https://doi.org/10.1080/00031305.2018.1529622
Abstract
It is widely acknowledged that the biomedical literature suffers from a surfeit of false positive results. Part of the reason for this is the persistence of the myth that observation of p < 0.05 is sufficient justification to claim that you have made a discovery. It is hopeless to expect users to change their reliance on p-values unless they are offered an alternative way of judging the reliability of their conclusions. If the alternative method is to have a chance of being adopted widely, it will have to be easy to understand and to calculate. One such proposal is based on calculation of false positive risk(FPR). It is suggested that p-values and confidence intervals should continue to be given, but that they should be supplemented by a single additional number that conveys the strength of the evidence better than the p-value. This number could be the minimum FPR (that calculated on the assumption of a prior probability of 0.5, the largest value that can be assumed in the absence of hard prior data). Alternatively one could specify the prior probability that it would be necessary to believe in order to achieve an FPR of, say, 0.05.Keywords
Funding Information
- None
This publication has 28 references indexed in Scilit:
- Uniformly most powerful Bayesian testsThe Annals of Statistics, 2013
- Reverse-Bayes analysis of two common misinterpretations of significance testsClinical Trials, 2013
- The Null Ritual: What You Always Wanted to Know About Significance Testing but Were Afraid to AskPublished by SAGE Publications ,2004
- Why should clinicians care about Bayesian methods?Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, 2001
- Testing Precise HypothesesStatistical Science, 1987
- Testing a Point Null Hypothesis: The Irreconcilability of P Values and EvidenceJournal of the American Statistical Association, 1987
- A comment on D. V. Lindley's statistical paradoxBiometrika, 1957
- A STATISTICAL PARADOXBiometrika, 1957
- THE PROBABLE ERROR OF A MEANBiometrika, 1908
- The Probable Error of a MeanBiometrika, 1908