1. Caring about Power Analyses
- Author
-
Jennifer E. Murray, Rebecca L. Brock, Rick A. Bevins, and Scott T. Barrett
- Subjects
Research design ,Consultants ,Physiology ,Cognitive Neuroscience ,Biostatistics ,Biochemistry ,Statistical power ,Rigour ,Power (social and political) ,03 medical and health sciences ,0302 clinical medicine ,Humans ,030212 general & internal medicine ,Replication crisis ,Actuarial science ,Biological variable ,Research ,05 social sciences ,Cell Biology ,General Medicine ,United States ,National Institutes of Health (U.S.) ,050902 family studies ,Sample size determination ,Research Design ,Data Interpretation, Statistical ,0509 other social sciences ,Periodicals as Topic ,Psychology ,Editorial Policies - Abstract
Everyone should care deeply about statistical power and effect size given that the current estimates of wasted nonreproducible and exaggerated research findings range from 50 to 85%, combined with the mandates from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) that proposal reviewers focus on scientific rigor and investigators consider sex as a biological variable. In this Viewpoint, we provide recommendations and resources regarding power analyses aimed at enhancing rigor, and hence decreasing waste, when designing experiments. As part of this effort, we also make recommendations for reporting key statistics that will aid others in estimating sample size based on published research.
- Published
- 2017