Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Addendum to the article: Misuse of null hypothesis significance testing: Would estimation of positive and negative predictive values improve certainty of chemical risk assessment?

  • Mirco Bundschuh
  • , Michael C. Newman
  • , Jochen P. Zubrod
  • , Frank Seitz
  • , Ricki R. Rosenfeldt
  • , Ralf Schulz

Publication: Other publication › Research › peer-review

Abstract

We argued recently that the positive predictive value (PPV) and the negative predictive value (NPV) are valuable metrics to include during null hypothesis significance testing: They inform the researcher about the probability of statistically significant and non-significant test outcomes actually being true. Although commonly misunderstood, a reported p value estimates only the probability of obtaining the results or more extreme results if the null hypothesis of no effect was true. Calculations of the more informative PPV and NPV require a priori estimate of the probability (R). The present document discusses challenges of estimating R.
Original languageEnglish
PublisherSpringer Heidelberg
Number of pages3
Volume22
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2015

Publication series

SeriesEnvironmental Science and Pollution Research
Number5
Volume22
ISSN0944-1344

Keywords

  • Bayesian
  • Effect size
  • Power analysis
  • Sample size
  • Type I error rate
  • Type II error rate

Cite this