Paper detail

B-Value and Empirical Equivalence Bound: A New Procedure of Hypothesis Testing

In this study, we propose a two-stage procedure for hypothesis testing, where the first stage is conventional hypothesis testing and the second is an equivalence testing procedure using an introduced Empirical Equivalence Bound. In 2016, the American Statistical Association released a policy statement on P-values to clarify the proper use and interpretation in response to the criticism of reproducibility and replicability in scientific findings. A recent solution to improve reproducibility and transparency in statistical hypothesis testing is to integrate P-values (or confidence intervals) with practical or scientific significance. Similar ideas have been proposed via the equivalence test, where the goal is to infer equality under a presumption (null) of inequality of parameters. However, in these testing procedures, the definition of scientific significance/equivalence can be subjective. To circumvent this drawback, we introduce a B-value and the Empirical Equivalence Bound, which are both estimated from the data. Performing a second-stage equivalence test, our procedure offers an opportunity to correct for false positive discoveries and improve the reproducibility in findings across studies.

preprint2019arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.