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。

本页为预印本版本;arXiv 收录、作者填写的期刊信息以及作者既有发表经历,都不单独证明本篇已接收。作者发表记录按 OpenAlex 身份与完整姓名、本站覆盖期刊 ISSN 及正式卷期核对,只展示已核实例,档案仍可能误合并。

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:摘要研究干预治疗效应的实验检验功效,并应用于经济学随机对照试验。

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
Stefan Faridani

检验研究文献是否统计功效不足

研究问题
若一组实验的样本量反事实地增加,预期会多出现多少显著结果,如何在发表偏差存在时估计这种功效变化?
方法与思路
作者提出反卷积估计量,调整发表偏差并建立渐近正态性;摘要称不限制真实治疗效应的分布形式,且允许点质量。
材料陈述的贡献
摘要报告,经济学期刊随机试验的样本量全部翻倍时,t检验功效平均提高7.2个百分点,并称模拟覆盖率表现良好。
阅读关注点
应核对发表选择机制、t统计量近似与样本量扩张的映射,以及反卷积正则化、渐近推断条件和文献样本的代表性。
阅读边界
这是arXiv预印本,同行评审或期刊接收未经核实。不限制效应分布不代表无需其他假设;摘要未列明选择模型与识别条件。

原文摘要

How many experimental studies would have come to different conclusions had they been run on larger samples? I show how to estimate the expected number of statistically significant results that a set of experiments would have reported had their sample sizes all been counterfactually increased. The proposed deconvolution estimator is asymptotically normal and adjusts for publication bias. Unlike related methods, this approach requires no assumptions of any kind about the distribution of true intervention treatment effects and allows for point masses. Simulations find good coverage even when the t-score is only approximately normal. An application to randomized trials (RCTs) published in economics journals finds that doubling every sample would increase the power of t-tests by 7.2 percentage points on average. This effect is smaller than for non-RCTs and comparable to systematic replications in laboratory psychology where previous studies enabled more accurate power calculations. This suggests that RCTs are on average relatively insensitive to sample size increases. Research funders who wish to raise power should generally consider sponsoring better-measured and higher quality experiments -- rather than only larger ones.

笔记与分组
相关领域论文