Dataset Information

False Positives and Other Statistical Errors in Standard Analyses of Eye Movements in Reading.

ABSTRACT: In research on eye movements in reading, it is common to analyze a number of canonical dependent measures to study how the effects of a manipulation unfold over time. Although this gives rise to the well-known multiple comparisons problem, i.e. an inflated probability that the null hypothesis is incorrectly rejected (Type I error), it is accepted standard practice not to apply any correction procedures. Instead, there appears to be a widespread belief that corrections are not necessary because the increase in false positives is too small to matter. To our knowledge, no formal argument has ever been presented to justify this assumption. Here, we report a computational investigation of this issue using Monte Carlo simulations. Our results show that, contrary to conventional wisdom, false positives are increased to unacceptable levels when no corrections are applied. Our simulations also show that counter-measures like the Bonferroni correction keep false positives in check while reducing statistical power only moderately. Hence, there is little reason why such corrections should not be made a standard requirement. Further, we discuss three statistical illusions that can arise when statistical power is low, and we show how power can be improved to prevent these illusions. In sum, our work renders a detailed picture of the various types of statistical errors than can occur in studies of reading behavior and we provide concrete guidance about how these errors can be avoided.

SUBMITTER: von der Malsburg T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5461930 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

False Positives and Other Statistical Errors in Standard Analyses of Eye Movements in Reading.

von der Malsburg Titus T Angele Bernhard B

Journal of memory and language 20161209

In research on eye movements in reading, it is common to analyze a number of canonical dependent measures to study how the effects of a manipulation unfold over time. Although this gives rise to the well-known multiple comparisons problem, i.e. an inflated probability that the null hypothesis is incorrectly rejected (Type I error), it is accepted standard practice not to apply any correction procedures. Instead, there appears to be a widespread belief that corrections are not necessary because t ...[more]

PMID: 28603341

Similar Datasets

Project description:Graph theory (GT) is a powerful framework for quantifying topological features of neuroimaging-derived functional and structural networks. However, false positive (FP) connections arise frequently and influence the inferred topology of networks. Thresholding is often used to overcome this problem, but an appropriate threshold often relies on a priori assumptions, which will alter inferred network topologies. Four common network metrics (global efficiency, mean clustering coefficient, mean betweenness and smallworldness) were tested using a model tractography dataset. It was found that all four network metrics were significantly affected even by just one FP. Results also show that thresholding effectively dampens the impact of FPs, but at the expense of adding significant bias to network metrics. In a larger number (n=248) of tractography datasets, statistics were computed across random group permutations for a range of thresholds, revealing that statistics for network metrics varied significantly more than for non-network metrics (i.e., number of streamlines and number of edges). Varying degrees of network atrophy were introduced artificially to half the datasets, to test sensitivity to genuine group differences. For some network metrics, this atrophy was detected as significant (p<0.05, determined using permutation testing) only across a limited range of thresholds. We propose a multi-threshold permutation correction (MTPC) method, based on the cluster-enhanced permutation correction approach, to identify sustained significant effects across clusters of thresholds. This approach minimises requirements to determine a single threshold a priori. We demonstrate improved sensitivity of MTPC-corrected metrics to genuine group effects compared to an existing approach and demonstrate the use of MTPC on a previously published network analysis of tractography data derived from a clinical population. In conclusion, we show that there are large biases and instability induced by thresholding, making statistical comparisons of network metrics difficult. However, by testing for effects across multiple thresholds using MTPC, true group differences can be robustly identified.

Dataset Information

False Positives and Other Statistical Errors in Standard Analyses of Eye Movements in Reading.

Publications

False Positives and Other Statistical Errors in Standard Analyses of Eye Movements in Reading.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets