↓ Skip to main content

The Heuristic Value of p in Inductive Statistical Inference

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
35 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
75 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Heuristic Value of p in Inductive Statistical Inference
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, June 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00908
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joachim I Krueger, Patrick R Heck

Abstract

Many statistical methods yield the probability of the observed data - or data more extreme - under the assumption that a particular hypothesis is true. This probability is commonly known as 'the' p-value. (Null Hypothesis) Significance Testing ([NH]ST) is the most prominent of these methods. The p-value has been subjected to much speculation, analysis, and criticism. We explore how well the p-value predicts what researchers presumably seek: the probability of the hypothesis being true given the evidence, and the probability of reproducing significant results. We also explore the effect of sample size on inferential accuracy, bias, and error. In a series of simulation experiments, we find that the p-value performs quite well as a heuristic cue in inductive inference, although there are identifiable limits to its usefulness. We conclude that despite its general usefulness, the p-value cannot bear the full burden of inductive inference; it is but one of several heuristic cues available to the data analyst. Depending on the inferential challenge at hand, investigators may supplement their reports with effect size estimates, Bayes factors, or other suitable statistics, to communicate what they think the data say.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 35 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 1%
Unknown 74 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 17%
Professor 7 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 7 9%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Other 13 17%
Unknown 16 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 23 31%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 5%
Social Sciences 4 5%
Neuroscience 4 5%
Other 19 25%
Unknown 17 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 42. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 January 2019.
All research outputs
#998,292
of 25,759,158 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#2,116
of 34,778 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,040
of 332,478 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#50
of 599 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,759,158 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,778 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 332,478 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 599 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.