Evaluating statistical difference, equivalence, and indeterminancy using inferential confidence intervals: An integrated alternative method of conducting null hypothesis statistical tests.

Null hypothesis statistical testing (NHST) has been debated extensively but always successfully defended. The technical merits of NHST are not disputed in this article. The widespread misuse of NHST has created a human factors problem that this article intends to ameliorate. This article describes an integrated, alternative inferential confidence interval approach to testing for statistical difference, equivalence, and indeterminacy that is algebraically equivalent to standard NHST procedures and therefore exacts the same evidential standard. The combined numeric and graphic tests of statistical difference, equivalence, and indeterminacy are designed to avoid common interpretive problems associated with NHST procedures. Multiple comparisons, power, sample size, test reliability, effect size, and cause-effect ratio are discussed. A section on the proper interpretation of confidence intervals is followed by a decision rule summary and caveats. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Inference by Eye: Confidence Intervals and How to Read Pictures of Data.

Wider use in psychology of confidence intervals (CIs), especially as error bars in figures, is a desirable development. However, psychologists seldom use CIs and may not understand them well. The authors discuss the interpretation of figures with error bars and analyze the relationship between CIs and statistical significance testing. They propose 7 rules of eye to guide the inferential use of figures with error bars. These include general principles: Seek bars that relate directly to effects of interest, be sensitive to experimental design, and interpret the intervals. They also include guidelines for inferential interpretation of the overlap of CIs on independent group means. Wider use of interval estimation in psychology has the potential to improve research communication substantially. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Statistical Practices of IJPT Researchers: A Review from 1993-2000.

Research articles published in the International Journal of Play Therapy (IJPT) were examined to investigate the use of selected statistical practices in quantitative inferential studies. The current article examined whether researchers (a) verified methodological assumptions of statistical analyses, (b) reported confidence intervals, (c) discussed the risk of experiment-wise Type I error, (d) preferred univariate analyses to multivariate analyses, (e) used univariate analyses as post hoc methods to detect multivariate effects, and (e) screened data and reported findings with graphical displays. Recommendations for improved statistical practice are provided. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

A score method of constructing asymmetric confidence intervals for the mean of a rating scale item.

This article presents a generalization of the Score method of constructing confidence intervals for the population proportion (E. B. Wilson, 1927) to the case of the population mean of a rating scale item. A simulation study was conducted to assess the properties of the Score confidence interval in relation to the traditional Wald (A. Wald, 1943) confidence interval under a variety of conditions, including sample size, number of response options, extremeness of the population mean, and kurtosis of the response distribution. The results of the simulation study indicated that the Score interval usually outperformed the Wald interval, suggesting that the Score interval is a viable method of constructing confidence intervals for the population mean of a rating scale item. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The validity and appropriateness of methods, analyses, and conclusions in Rind et al. (1998): A rebuttal of victimological critique from Ondersma et al. (2001) and Dallam et al. (2001).

The authors respond to 2 victimological critiques of their 1998 meta-analysis on child sexual abuse (CSA). S. J. Dallam et al. (see record 2001-05308-002) (2001) claimed that B. Rind, P. Tromovitch, and R. Bauserman (see record 1998-04232-002) (1998) committed numerous methodological and statistical errors, and often miscoded and misinterpreted data. The authors show all these claims to be invalid. To the contrary, they demonstrate frequent bias in Dallam et al.'s criticisms. S. J. Ondersma et al. (see record 2001-05308-001) (2001) claimed that Rind et al.'s study is part of a backlash against psychotherapists, that its suggestions regarding CSA definitions were extrascientific, and that the moral standard is needed to understand CSA scientifically. The authors show their suggestions to have been scientific and argue that it is Ondersma et al.'s issue-framing and moral standard that are extrascientific. This reply supports the original methods, analyses, recommendations, and conclusions of Rind et al. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Decomposing Person and Occasion-Specific Effects: An Extension of Latent State-Trait (LSI) Theory to Hierarchical LST Models.

An extension of latent state-trait (LST) theory to hierarchical LST models is presented. In hierarchical LST models, the covariances between 2 or more latent traits are explained by a general 3rd-order factor, and the covariances between latent state residuals pertaining to different traits measured on the same measurement occasion are explained by 2nd-order latent occasion-specific factors. Analogous to recent developments in multitrait-multimethod methodology, all factors are interpreted in relation to factors taken as comparison standards. An empirical example from test anxiety research illustrates how estimates of additive variance components due to general trait, specific trait, occasion, state residual, method, and measurement error can be obtained using confirmatory factor analysis. Advantages and limitations of these models are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)