Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Psychiatry 1/2018

Open Access 01-12-2018 | Technical advance

Bayesian alternatives for common null-hypothesis significance tests in psychiatry: a non-technical guide using JASP

Authors: Daniel S. Quintana, Donald R. Williams

Published in: BMC Psychiatry | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Despite its popularity as an inferential framework, classical null hypothesis significance testing (NHST) has several restrictions. Bayesian analysis can be used to complement NHST, however, this approach has been underutilized largely due to a dearth of accessible software options. JASP is a recently developed open-source statistical package that facilitates both Bayesian and NHST analysis using a graphical interface. This article provides an applied introduction to Bayesian inference with Bayes factors using JASP.

Methods

We use JASP to compare and contrast Bayesian alternatives for several common classical null hypothesis significance tests: correlations, frequency distributions, t-tests, ANCOVAs, and ANOVAs. These examples are also used to illustrate the strengths and limitations of both NHST and Bayesian hypothesis testing.

Results

A comparison of NHST and Bayesian inferential frameworks demonstrates that Bayes factors can complement p-values by providing additional information for hypothesis testing. Namely, Bayes factors can quantify relative evidence for both alternative and null hypotheses. Moreover, the magnitude of this evidence can be presented as an easy-to-interpret odds ratio.

Conclusions

While Bayesian analysis is by no means a new method, this type of statistical inference has been largely inaccessible for most psychiatry researchers. JASP provides a straightforward means of performing reproducible Bayesian hypothesis tests using a graphical “point and click” environment that will be familiar to researchers conversant with other graphical statistical packages, such as SPSS.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Gigerenzer G, Swijtink Z, Daston L. The empire of chance: how probability changed science and everyday life, vol. 12. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1990. Gigerenzer G,  Swijtink Z,  Daston L. The empire of chance: how probability changed science and everyday life, vol. 12. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1990.
2.
go back to reference Greenland S, Senn SJ, Rothman KJ, Carlin JB, Poole C, Goodman SN, Altman DG. Statistical tests, P values, confidence intervals, and power: a guide to misinterpretations. Eur J Epidemiol. 2016;31(4):337–50.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Greenland S, Senn SJ, Rothman KJ, Carlin JB, Poole C, Goodman SN, Altman DG. Statistical tests, P values, confidence intervals, and power: a guide to misinterpretations. Eur J Epidemiol. 2016;31(4):337–50.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
3.
go back to reference Nickerson RS. Null hypothesis significance testing: a review of an old and continuing controversy. Psychol Methods. 2000;5(2):241–301.CrossRefPubMed Nickerson RS. Null hypothesis significance testing: a review of an old and continuing controversy. Psychol Methods. 2000;5(2):241–301.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Dienes Z. Using Bayes to get the most out of non-significant results. Front Psychol. 2014;5(781):1–17. Dienes Z. Using Bayes to get the most out of non-significant results. Front Psychol. 2014;5(781):1–17.
5.
go back to reference Royall R. Statistical evidence: a likelihood paradigm, vol. 71. London: CRC press; 1997. Royall R. Statistical evidence: a likelihood paradigm, vol. 71. London: CRC press; 1997.
6.
go back to reference Schuirmann DJ. A comparison of the two one-sided tests procedure and the power approach for assessing the equivalence of average bioavailability. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn. 1987;15(6):657–80.CrossRef Schuirmann DJ. A comparison of the two one-sided tests procedure and the power approach for assessing the equivalence of average bioavailability. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn. 1987;15(6):657–80.CrossRef
8.
9.
go back to reference Gelman A, Carlin JB, Stern HS, Dunson DB, Vehtari A, Rubin DB. Bayesian data analysis, vol. 2. Boca Raton, FL: CRC press; 2014. Gelman A, Carlin JB, Stern HS, Dunson DB, Vehtari A, Rubin DB. Bayesian data analysis, vol. 2. Boca Raton, FL: CRC press; 2014.
10.
go back to reference McElreath R. Statistical rethinking: a Bayesian course with examples in R and Stan. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 2015.CrossRef McElreath R. Statistical rethinking: a Bayesian course with examples in R and Stan. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 2015.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Lee MD, Wagenmakers E-J. Bayesian statistical inference in psychology: comment on Trafimow (2003). Psychol Rev. 2005;112(3):662–8.CrossRefPubMed Lee MD, Wagenmakers E-J. Bayesian statistical inference in psychology: comment on Trafimow (2003). Psychol Rev. 2005;112(3):662–8.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Dienes Z. Understanding psychology as a science: an introduction to scientific and statistical inference. New York: Palgrave Macmillan; 2008. Dienes Z. Understanding psychology as a science: an introduction to scientific and statistical inference. New York: Palgrave Macmillan; 2008.
13.
go back to reference Morey RD, Rouder JN, Verhagen J, Wagenmakers E-J. Why hypothesis tests are essential for psychological science a comment on Cumming (2014). Psychol Sci. 2014;25(6):1289–90.CrossRefPubMed Morey RD, Rouder JN, Verhagen J, Wagenmakers E-J. Why hypothesis tests are essential for psychological science a comment on Cumming (2014). Psychol Sci. 2014;25(6):1289–90.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Chung Y, Rabe-Hesketh S, Gelman A, Liu J, Dorie V. Avoiding boundary estimates in linear mixed models through weakly informative priors. UC Berkeley Division of Biostatistics Working Paper Series. 2012; Working Paper 284. Chung Y, Rabe-Hesketh S, Gelman A, Liu J, Dorie V. Avoiding boundary estimates in linear mixed models through weakly informative priors. UC Berkeley Division of Biostatistics Working Paper Series. 2012; Working Paper 284.
15.
go back to reference Chung Y, Rabe-Hesketh S, Choi IH. Avoiding zero between-study variance estimates in random-effects meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2013;32(23):4071–89.CrossRefPubMed Chung Y, Rabe-Hesketh S, Choi IH. Avoiding zero between-study variance estimates in random-effects meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2013;32(23):4071–89.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Gelman A, Simpson D, Betancourt M: The prior can generally only be understood in the context of the likelihood. arXiv preprint arXiv:170807487 2017. Gelman A, Simpson D, Betancourt M: The prior can generally only be understood in the context of the likelihood. arXiv preprint arXiv:170807487 2017.
17.
go back to reference Dienes Z. Bayesian versus orthodox statistics: which side are you on? Perspect Psychol Sci. 2011;6(3):274–90.CrossRefPubMed Dienes Z. Bayesian versus orthodox statistics: which side are you on? Perspect Psychol Sci. 2011;6(3):274–90.CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Jeffreys H. The theory of probability. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1961. Jeffreys H. The theory of probability. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1961.
19.
go back to reference Rouder JN, Speckman PL, Sun D, Morey RD, Iverson G. Bayesian t tests for accepting and rejecting the null hypothesis. Psychon Bull Rev. 2009;16(2):225–37.CrossRefPubMed Rouder JN, Speckman PL, Sun D, Morey RD, Iverson G. Bayesian t tests for accepting and rejecting the null hypothesis. Psychon Bull Rev. 2009;16(2):225–37.CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Gelman A, Jakulin A, Pittau MG, Su Y-S. A weakly informative default prior distribution for logistic and other regression models. Ann Appl Stat. 2008:1360–83. Gelman A, Jakulin A, Pittau MG, Su Y-S. A weakly informative default prior distribution for logistic and other regression models. Ann Appl Stat. 2008:1360–83.
21.
go back to reference Vanpaemel W. Prior sensitivity in theory testing: an apologia for the Bayes factor. J Math Psychol. 2010;54(6):491–8.CrossRef Vanpaemel W. Prior sensitivity in theory testing: an apologia for the Bayes factor. J Math Psychol. 2010;54(6):491–8.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Wetzels R, Matzke D, Lee MD, Rouder JN, Iverson GJ, Wagenmakers E-J. Statistical evidence in experimental psychology an empirical comparison using 855 t tests. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2011;6(3):291–8.CrossRefPubMed Wetzels R, Matzke D, Lee MD, Rouder JN, Iverson GJ, Wagenmakers E-J. Statistical evidence in experimental psychology an empirical comparison using 855 t tests. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2011;6(3):291–8.CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Lee MD, Wagenmakers E-J. Bayesian cognitive modeling: a practical course. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2014. Lee MD, Wagenmakers E-J. Bayesian cognitive modeling: a practical course. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2014.
24.
go back to reference Kass RE, Raftery AE. Bayes factors. J Am Stat Assoc. 1995;90(430):773–95.CrossRef Kass RE, Raftery AE. Bayes factors. J Am Stat Assoc. 1995;90(430):773–95.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Wagenmakers E-J, Love J, Marsman M, Jamil T, Ly A, Verhagen J, Selker R, Gronau QF, Dropmann D, Boutin B, et al. Bayesian inference for psychology. Part II: example applications with JASP. Psychon Bull Rev. 2018;25(1):58–76.CrossRefPubMed Wagenmakers E-J, Love J, Marsman M, Jamil T, Ly A, Verhagen J, Selker R, Gronau QF, Dropmann D, Boutin B, et al. Bayesian inference for psychology. Part II: example applications with JASP. Psychon Bull Rev. 2018;25(1):58–76.CrossRefPubMed
28.
go back to reference Van Cappellen P, Way BM, Isgett SF, Fredrickson BL. Effects of oxytocin administration on spirituality and emotional responses to meditation. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2016;11(10):1579–87.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Van Cappellen P, Way BM, Isgett SF, Fredrickson BL. Effects of oxytocin administration on spirituality and emotional responses to meditation. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2016;11(10):1579–87.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
29.
go back to reference Guastella AJ, MacLeod C. A critical review of the influence of oxytocin nasal spray on social cognition in humans: evidence and future directions. Horm Behav. 2012;61(3):410–8.CrossRefPubMed Guastella AJ, MacLeod C. A critical review of the influence of oxytocin nasal spray on social cognition in humans: evidence and future directions. Horm Behav. 2012;61(3):410–8.CrossRefPubMed
30.
go back to reference Wagenmakers E-J. A practical solution to the pervasive problems of p values. Psychon Bull Rev. 2007;14(5):779–804.CrossRefPubMed Wagenmakers E-J. A practical solution to the pervasive problems of p values. Psychon Bull Rev. 2007;14(5):779–804.CrossRefPubMed
31.
go back to reference Ly A, Verhagen J, Wagenmakers E-J. Harold Jeffreys’s default Bayes factor hypothesis tests: explanation, extension, and application in psychology. J Math Psychol. 2016;72:19–32.CrossRef Ly A, Verhagen J, Wagenmakers E-J. Harold Jeffreys’s default Bayes factor hypothesis tests: explanation, extension, and application in psychology. J Math Psychol. 2016;72:19–32.CrossRef
33.
go back to reference Gunel E, Dickey J. Bayes factors for independence in contingency tables. Biometrika. 1974;61(3):545–57.CrossRef Gunel E, Dickey J. Bayes factors for independence in contingency tables. Biometrika. 1974;61(3):545–57.CrossRef
34.
go back to reference Jamil T, Ly A, Morey RD, Love J, Marsman M, Wagenmakers E-J. Default “Gunel and dickey” Bayes factors for contingency tables. Behav Res. 2017;49(2):638–52.CrossRef Jamil T, Ly A, Morey RD, Love J, Marsman M, Wagenmakers E-J. Default “Gunel and dickey” Bayes factors for contingency tables. Behav Res. 2017;49(2):638–52.CrossRef
35.
go back to reference Cho H-C, Abe S. Is two-tailed testing for directional research hypotheses tests legitimate? J Bus Res. 2013;66(9):1261–6.CrossRef Cho H-C, Abe S. Is two-tailed testing for directional research hypotheses tests legitimate? J Bus Res. 2013;66(9):1261–6.CrossRef
36.
go back to reference Walum H, Waldman ID, Young LJ. Statistical and methodological considerations for the interpretation of intranasal oxytocin studies. Biol Psychiatry. 2016;79(3):251–7.CrossRefPubMed Walum H, Waldman ID, Young LJ. Statistical and methodological considerations for the interpretation of intranasal oxytocin studies. Biol Psychiatry. 2016;79(3):251–7.CrossRefPubMed
37.
go back to reference Gronau QF, Ly A, Wagenmakers E-J: Informed Bayesian t-tests. arXiv preprint arXiv:170402479 2017. Gronau QF, Ly A, Wagenmakers E-J: Informed Bayesian t-tests. arXiv preprint arXiv:170402479 2017.
38.
go back to reference Rouder JN, Morey RD. Default Bayes factors for model selection in regression. Multivar Behav Res. 2012;47(6):877–903.CrossRef Rouder JN, Morey RD. Default Bayes factors for model selection in regression. Multivar Behav Res. 2012;47(6):877–903.CrossRef
39.
go back to reference Morey RD, Rouder JN. Bayes factor approaches for testing interval null hypotheses. Psychol Methods. 2011;16(4):406.CrossRefPubMed Morey RD, Rouder JN. Bayes factor approaches for testing interval null hypotheses. Psychol Methods. 2011;16(4):406.CrossRefPubMed
40.
go back to reference Rouder JN, Morey RD, Verhagen J, Swagman AR, Wagenmakers E-J. Bayesian analysis of factorial designs. Psychol Methods. 2017;22(2):304.CrossRefPubMed Rouder JN, Morey RD, Verhagen J, Swagman AR, Wagenmakers E-J. Bayesian analysis of factorial designs. Psychol Methods. 2017;22(2):304.CrossRefPubMed
41.
go back to reference Rouder JN, Engelhardt CR, McCabe S, Morey RD. Model comparison in ANOVA. Psychon Bull Rev. 2016;23(6):1779–86.CrossRefPubMed Rouder JN, Engelhardt CR, McCabe S, Morey RD. Model comparison in ANOVA. Psychon Bull Rev. 2016;23(6):1779–86.CrossRefPubMed
43.
go back to reference Carlsson R, Schimmack U, Williams D, Bürkner P-C. Bayes factors from pooled data are no substitute for Bayesian meta-Analysis: commentary on Scheibehenne, Jamil, and Wagenmakers (2016). Psychol Sci. 2017;28(11):1694–97. Carlsson R, Schimmack U, Williams D, Bürkner P-C. Bayes factors from pooled data are no substitute for Bayesian meta-Analysis: commentary on Scheibehenne, Jamil, and Wagenmakers (2016). Psychol Sci. 2017;28(11):1694–97.
44.
go back to reference Wagenmakers E-J, Marsman M, Jamil T, Ly A, Verhagen J, Love J, Selker R, Gronau QF, Šmíra M, Epskamp S. Bayesian inference for psychology. Part I: theoretical advantages and practical ramifications. Psychon Bull Rev. 2018;25(1):35–57. Wagenmakers E-J, Marsman M, Jamil T, Ly A, Verhagen J, Love J, Selker R, Gronau QF, Šmíra M, Epskamp S. Bayesian inference for psychology. Part I: theoretical advantages and practical ramifications. Psychon Bull Rev. 2018;25(1):35–57.
45.
go back to reference Munafò MR, Nosek BA, Bishop DV, Button KS, Chambers CD, du Sert NP, Simonsohn U, Wagenmakers E-J, Ware JJ, Ioannidis JP. A manifesto for reproducible science. Nat Hum Behavi. 2017;1:0021.CrossRef Munafò MR, Nosek BA, Bishop DV, Button KS, Chambers CD, du Sert NP, Simonsohn U, Wagenmakers E-J, Ware JJ, Ioannidis JP. A manifesto for reproducible science. Nat Hum Behavi. 2017;1:0021.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Bayesian alternatives for common null-hypothesis significance tests in psychiatry: a non-technical guide using JASP
Authors
Daniel S. Quintana
Donald R. Williams
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Psychiatry / Issue 1/2018
Electronic ISSN: 1471-244X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-018-1761-4

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

BMC Psychiatry 1/2018 Go to the issue