Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Adjusting for differential base rates: Lord's paradox again.

H Wainer1

  • 1Educational Testing Service, Princeton, New Jersey.

Psychological Bulletin
|January 1, 1991
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Speed vs reaction time as a measure of cognitive performance.

Memory & cognition·2013
Same author

The centercept: an estimable and meaningful regression parameter.

Psychological science·2001
Same author

Statistical graphics: mapping the pathways of science.

Annual review of psychology·2001
Same author

Current uses of the computer in medicine.

The Journal of the American Osteopathic Association·1979
Same author

On the assessment of skeletal maturity.

The American journal of clinical nutrition·1979
Same author

Predicting adult stature without skeletal age and without paternal data.

Pediatrics·1978

Statistical adjustment for baseline differences is crucial when comparing group responses. For animal heart rate studies, subtracting the baseline is the most appropriate method, avoiding paradoxes in causal effect measurement.

Area of Science:

  • Physiology
  • Biostatistics
  • Animal Science

Background:

  • Comparing group responses to stimuli requires statistical adjustment for baseline differences.
  • This is particularly relevant in animal studies, such as those investigating heart rate in animals of varying ages.
  • Several statistical adjustment methods exist, including subtracting, dividing by, or covarying out the baseline rate.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To address the critical choice among different statistical adjustment methodologies for baseline differences.
  • To demonstrate how Lord's Paradox applies to these adjustment strategies.
  • To utilize Rubin's Causal Model to clarify the assumptions behind each method's validity.

Main Methods:

  • The study frames the problem as an instance of Lord's Paradox.

Related Experiment Videos

  • It applies Rubin's Causal Model to analyze the assumptions of three adjustment methods: subtraction, division, and covariate adjustment.
  • The methodologies are evaluated in the context of comparing stimulus effects across groups with differing baseline measurements.

    • Main Results:

    • Different adjustment methods can yield significantly different results, highlighting the importance of method selection.
    • Rubin's Causal Model provides a framework for understanding the underlying assumptions and validity of each statistical approach.
    • The analysis indicates that for heart rate data in animals of different ages, subtracting the baseline is the most appropriate adjustment strategy.

    Conclusions:

    • The choice of statistical adjustment method for baseline differences is critical and impacts study outcomes.
    • Understanding the assumptions of each method, as illuminated by Rubin's Causal Model, is essential for valid causal inference.
    • Methodology (a), subtracting the baseline, is strongly recommended for adjusting heart rate data in comparative animal studies.