跳到正文
← 返回论文列表与筛选
阅读说明

本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。

DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。

引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。

关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。

分类依据与纠错

AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要讨论跨研究的贝叶斯证据与可重复性评估,社会科学案例不足以将通用统计方法归入所列经济细分领域。

反馈分类问题

正在核对关联版本…

代码、数据与补充材料

正在核对对应版本的资源…

关注这篇论文的作者
Samuel Pawel
Leonhard Held

用于评估重复研究成功的怀疑贝叶斯因子

研究问题
如何综合原研究和重复研究的证据强度与效应估计相容性,建立可操作的重复成功标准,而不只看两次结果是否显著?
方法与思路
作者结合逆向贝叶斯分析与假设检验,构造使原发现不再有说服力的怀疑先验,并用重复数据将其与支持先验进行比较。
材料陈述的贡献
摘要称怀疑贝叶斯因子同时要求两项研究具有充分反零假设证据,并惩罚效应估计不相容;另分析渐近性质、错误率与案例。
阅读关注点
阅读时应核对两类先验的构造、重复成功判定层级、因子存在与计算条件,以及错误率分析和案例比较采用的基准。
阅读边界
仅据所给 Crossref 摘要;先验设定、判定条件与错误率数值未提供,作者所述优势不能据此推广至所有重复研究。

原文摘要

Abstract Replication studies are increasingly conducted but there is no established statistical criterion for replication success. We propose a novel approach combining reverse-Bayes analysis with Bayesian hypothesis testing: a sceptical prior is determined for the effect size such that the original finding is no longer convincing in terms of a Bayes factor. This prior is then contrasted to an advocacy prior (the reference posterior of the effect size based on the original study), and replication success is declared if the replication data favour the advocacy over the sceptical prior at a higher level than the original data favoured the sceptical prior over the null hypothesis. The sceptical Bayes factor is the highest level where replication success can be declared. A comparison to existing methods reveals that the sceptical Bayes factor combines several notions of replicability: it ensures that both studies show sufficient evidence against the null and penalises incompatibility of their effect estimates. Analysis of asymptotic properties and error rates, as well as case studies from the Social Sciences Replication Project show the advantages of the method for the assessment of replicability.

笔记与分组
相关领域论文