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 Concept Videos

Significance Testing: Overview01:04

Significance Testing: Overview

12.9K
Significance testing is a set of statistical methods used to test whether a claim about a parameter is valid. In analytical chemistry, significance testing is used primarily to determine whether the difference between two values comes from determinate or random errors. The effect of a particular change in the measurement protocol, analyst, or sample itself can cause a deviation from the expected result. In the case of a suspected deviation/outlier, we need to be able to confirm mathematically...
12.9K
Statistical Significance01:50

Statistical Significance

23.1K
Once data is collected from both the experimental and the control groups, a statistical analysis is conducted to find out if there are meaningful differences between the two groups. A statistical analysis determines how likely any difference found is due to chance (and thus not meaningful). In psychology, group differences are considered meaningful, or significant, if the odds that these differences occurred by chance alone are 5 percent or less. Stated another way, if we repeated this...
23.1K
Decision Making: Traditional Method01:14

Decision Making: Traditional Method

5.6K
The process of hypothesis testing based on the traditional method includes calculating the critical value, testing the value of the test statistic using the sample data, and interpreting these values.
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is decided based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to this claim is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses, out of which a null hypothesis would be a...
5.6K
Bonferroni Test01:10

Bonferroni Test

3.5K
The Bonferroni test is a statistical test named after Carlo Emilio Bonferroni, an Italian mathematician best known for Bonferroni inequalities. This statistical test is a type of multiple comparison test to determine which means are different than the rest. Bonferroni test can minimize the Type 1 error by reducing the significance level alpha, which otherwise increases with sample pairs.
The means of different samples are first paired in all possible combinations.
The null hypothesis of the...
3.5K
Decision Making: P-value Method01:09

Decision Making: P-value Method

7.1K
The process of hypothesis testing based on the P-value method includes calculating the P- value using the sample data and interpreting it.
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is proposed. The claim is based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to the claim  is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses:  a null hypothesis would be a neutral statement while the alternative hypothesis can...
7.1K
Statistical Hypothesis Testing01:16

Statistical Hypothesis Testing

7.0K
Hypothesis testing is a critical statistical procedure facilitating informed, evidence-based decisions. It begins with a hypothesis, which is a tentative explanation, or a prediction about a population parameter. This hypothesis can be either a null hypothesis (H0), indicating no effect or difference, or an alternative hypothesis (Ha), suggesting an effect or difference.
Statistical significance measures the probability that an observed result occurred by chance. If this probability, known as...
7.0K

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

Experience of Responding to Imaginative Suggestions: A Micro-Phenomenological Interview Exploratory Study.

The International journal of clinical and experimental hypnosis·2026
Same author

Studying unconscious processing: Contention and consensus.

The Behavioral and brain sciences·2025
Same author

Bayes factors for logistic (mixed-effect) models.

Psychological methods·2024
Same author

Can the left hand benefit from being right? The influence of body side on perceived grasping ability.

Attention, perception & psychophysics·2024
Same author

High economic inequality is linked to greater moralization.

PNAS nexus·2024
Same author

Use one system for all results to avoid contradiction: Advice for using significance tests, equivalence tests, and Bayes factors.

Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance·2024

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Mar 5, 2026

A Novel Bayesian Change-point Algorithm for Genome-wide Analysis of Diverse ChIPseq Data Types
12:39

A Novel Bayesian Change-point Algorithm for Genome-wide Analysis of Diverse ChIPseq Data Types

Published on: December 10, 2012

11.7K

Four reasons to prefer Bayesian analyses over significance testing.

Zoltan Dienes1, Neil Mclatchie2

  • 1School of Psychology, University of Sussex, Brighton, BN1 9QH, UK. dienes@sussex.ac.uk.

Psychonomic Bulletin & Review
|March 30, 2017
PubMed
Summary

Significance testing and Bayes factors are compared for scientific inference. Bayes factors provide more nuanced evidential conclusions, especially when significance testing results are ambiguous or counterintuitive.

Keywords:
Bayes factorBayesian statisticsPowerSignificance testingStatistics

More Related Videos

A Tactile Automated Passive-Finger Stimulator TAPS
19:44

A Tactile Automated Passive-Finger Stimulator TAPS

Published on: June 3, 2009

14.2K
Determining the Likelihood of Variant Pathogenicity Using Amino Acid-level Signal-to-Noise Analysis of Genetic Variation
07:15

Determining the Likelihood of Variant Pathogenicity Using Amino Acid-level Signal-to-Noise Analysis of Genetic Variation

Published on: January 16, 2019

11.5K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Mar 5, 2026

A Novel Bayesian Change-point Algorithm for Genome-wide Analysis of Diverse ChIPseq Data Types
12:39

A Novel Bayesian Change-point Algorithm for Genome-wide Analysis of Diverse ChIPseq Data Types

Published on: December 10, 2012

11.7K
A Tactile Automated Passive-Finger Stimulator TAPS
19:44

A Tactile Automated Passive-Finger Stimulator TAPS

Published on: June 3, 2009

14.2K
Determining the Likelihood of Variant Pathogenicity Using Amino Acid-level Signal-to-Noise Analysis of Genetic Variation
07:15

Determining the Likelihood of Variant Pathogenicity Using Amino Acid-level Signal-to-Noise Analysis of Genetic Variation

Published on: January 16, 2019

11.5K

Area of Science:

  • Statistics
  • Scientific Inference
  • Research Methodology

Background:

  • Significance testing (p-values) and Bayes factors are common statistical methods for hypothesis testing.
  • Discrepancies between these methods can lead to different research conclusions.
  • Understanding these differences is crucial for accurate data interpretation.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare and contrast significance testing and Bayes factors in real-world research scenarios.
  • To evaluate which method aligns better with sensible evidential conclusions.
  • To highlight the limitations of p-values and the strengths of Bayes factors in specific contexts.

Main Methods:

  • Analysis of five case studies using real research data.
  • Comparison of conclusions drawn from significance testing (p-values) and Bayes factors.
  • Evaluation of evidential support for null (H0) versus alternative (H1) hypotheses.

Main Results:

  • Significance testing and Bayes factors often agree on hypothesis support.
  • Disagreements were observed in four out of five case studies.
  • Bayes factors accurately reflected nuanced evidence, such as substantial evidence for H0 with low-powered non-significant results, and no strong evidence for H1 with high-powered significant results.
  • Bayes factors can quantify the evidential support for different theories from the same data, unlike p-values.

Conclusions:

  • Bayesian inference, using Bayes factors, often provides more appropriate evidential conclusions than significance testing, particularly when results are non-significant or significant but inconclusive.
  • Significance testing can be misleading, failing to reflect the true evidential weight of the data.
  • Researchers should consider Bayes factors for a more robust interpretation of scientific evidence.