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

Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups01:20

Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups

621
Survival analysis is a cornerstone of medical research, used to evaluate the time until an event of interest occurs, such as death, disease recurrence, or recovery. Unlike standard statistical methods, survival analysis is particularly adept at handling censored data—instances where the event has not occurred for some participants by the end of the study or remains unobserved. To address these unique challenges, specialized techniques like the Kaplan-Meier estimator, log-rank test, and...
621
Statistical Significance01:50

Statistical Significance

22.3K
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...
22.3K
Statistical Analysis: Overview01:11

Statistical Analysis: Overview

16.7K
When we take repeated measurements on the same or replicated samples, we will observe inconsistencies in the magnitude. These inconsistencies are called errors. To categorize and characterize these results and their errors, the researcher can use statistical analysis to determine the quality of the measurements and/or suitability of the methods.
One of the most commonly used statistical quantifiers is the mean, which is the ratio between the sum of the numerical values of all results and the...
16.7K
Outliers and Influential Points01:08

Outliers and Influential Points

6.3K
An outlier is an observation of data that does not fit the rest of the data. It is sometimes called an extreme value. When you graph an outlier, it will appear not to fit the pattern of the graph. Some outliers are due to mistakes (for example, writing down 50 instead of 500), while others may indicate that something unusual is happening. Outliers are present far from the least squares line in the vertical direction. They have large "errors," where the "error" or residual is the...
6.3K
Significance Testing: Overview01:04

Significance Testing: Overview

12.8K
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...
12.8K
Statistical Inference Techniques in Hypothesis Testing: Parametric Versus Nonparametric Data01:16

Statistical Inference Techniques in Hypothesis Testing: Parametric Versus Nonparametric Data

514
Statistical inference techniques, paramount in hypothesis testing, differentiate into two broad categories: parametric and nonparametric statistics.
Parametric statistics, as the name suggests, assumes that data follow a specific distribution, often a normal distribution. This assumption enables robust hypothesis testing and estimation. Parametric methods, like the Student's t-test or Goodness-of-fit test, are frequently employed in biostatistics due to their robustness. For instance,...
514

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

Advantages in Bayesian Approaches to Confirmatory Factor Analysis.

Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research·2026
Same author

Modular item response and structural equation modelling via measurement and uncertainty preserving parametric modelling.

The British journal of mathematical and statistical psychology·2026
Same author

Obituary Robert J. Mislevy (1950-2025).

Psychometrika·2025
Same author

Working Memory Structure in Young Spanish-English Bilingual Children.

Bilingualism (Cambridge, England)·2025
Same author

Parenting of siblings in Latinx families during middle childhood.

Journal of family psychology : JFP : journal of the Division of Family Psychology of the American Psychological Association (Division 43)·2023
Same author

"More is better" or "better near the middle"? A U.S.-based individual participant data meta-analysis of socioeconomic status and depressive symptoms.

The American psychologist·2022

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Feb 16, 2026

The Innovation Arena: A Method for Comparing Innovative Problem-Solving Across Groups
14:14

The Innovation Arena: A Method for Comparing Innovative Problem-Solving Across Groups

Published on: May 13, 2022

6.4K

Distinguishing outcomes from indicators via Bayesian modeling.

Roy Levy1

  • 1Arizona State University.

Psychological Methods
|December 22, 2017
PubMed
Summary

This study introduces modified Bayesian procedures to correctly distinguish indicators from outcomes in statistical models. This prevents interpretational confounding and improves latent variable analysis.

Area of Science:

  • Psychometrics
  • Statistical Modeling
  • Bayesian Inference

Background:

  • A conceptual distinction exists between indicators and outcomes in statistical modeling.
  • Current frequentist and Bayesian methods fail to uphold this distinction, leading to interpretational confounding.
  • Latent variables become susceptible to confounding when outcomes influence their measurement.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To propose modified Bayesian procedures that maintain the conceptual distinction between indicators and outcomes.
  • To develop methods for diagnostic model-data fit analyses within this framework.
  • To address interpretational confounding in latent variable modeling.

Main Methods:

  • Development of modified Bayesian estimation procedures.

More Related Videos

Selecting Multiple Biomarker Subsets with Similarly Effective Binary Classification Performances
07:35

Selecting Multiple Biomarker Subsets with Similarly Effective Binary Classification Performances

Published on: October 11, 2018

8.1K
Development of an Individual-Tree Basal Area Increment Model using a Linear Mixed-Effects Approach
04:35

Development of an Individual-Tree Basal Area Increment Model using a Linear Mixed-Effects Approach

Published on: July 3, 2020

3.8K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Feb 16, 2026

The Innovation Arena: A Method for Comparing Innovative Problem-Solving Across Groups
14:14

The Innovation Arena: A Method for Comparing Innovative Problem-Solving Across Groups

Published on: May 13, 2022

6.4K
Selecting Multiple Biomarker Subsets with Similarly Effective Binary Classification Performances
07:35

Selecting Multiple Biomarker Subsets with Similarly Effective Binary Classification Performances

Published on: October 11, 2018

8.1K
Development of an Individual-Tree Basal Area Increment Model using a Linear Mixed-Effects Approach
04:35

Development of an Individual-Tree Basal Area Increment Model using a Linear Mixed-Effects Approach

Published on: July 3, 2020

3.8K
  • Implementation of diagnostic analyses for model-data fit.
  • Simulation studies to evaluate the performance of new procedures compared to existing strategies.

    • Main Results:

    • The proposed modified Bayesian procedures successfully preclude outcomes from influencing latent variables and measurement parameters.
    • Diagnostic procedures enhance the assessment of model-data fit.
    • Simulation results demonstrate superior performance of the new strategies over existing methods.

    Conclusions:

    • Modified Bayesian procedures offer a robust solution to interpretational confounding in latent variable modeling.
    • The distinction between indicators and outcomes is crucial for accurate measurement and interpretation.
    • These advancements provide improved tools for psychometric and statistical analysis.