Fragilità, credibilità, controfattuale

AHMED, W., FOWLER, R.A., MCCREDIE, V.A. (2016). Does sample size matter when interpreting the fragility index?. In: «Critical Care Medicine», vol. XLIV, n. 11, pp. 1142-1143.

AMRHEIN, V., GREENLAND, S., MCSHANE, B. (2019). Scientists raise up against statistical significance. In: «Nature», vol. DLXVII, n. 7748, pp. 305-307.

BENJAMIN, D.J., BERGER, J.O., JOHANNESSON, M., NOSEK, B.A., WAGENMALERS, E.J., BERK, R., BOLLEN, K.A., BREMBS, B., BROWN, L., CAMERER, C., CESARINI, D., CHAMBERS, C.D., CLYDE, M., COOK, T.D., DE BOECK, P., DIENES, Z., DREBER, A., EASWARAN, K., EFFERSON, C., FEHR, E., FIDLER, F., FIELD, A.P., FORSTER, M., GEORGE, E.I., GONZALES, R., GOODMAN, S., GREEN, E., GREEN, D.P., GREENWALD, A.G., HADFIELD, J.D., HEDGES, L.V., HELD, L., HO, T.H., HOJJTINK, H., HRUSCHKA, D.J., IMAI, K., IMBENS, G., IOANNIDIS, J.P.A., JEON, M., JONES, J.H., KIRCHLER, M., LAIBSON, D., LIST, J., LITTLE, R., LUPIA, A., MACHERY, E., MAXWELL, S.E., MCCARTHY, M., MOORE, D.A., MORGAN, S.L., MUNAFO, M., NAKAGAWA, S., NYHAN, B., PARKER, T.H., PERICCHI, L., PERUGINI, M., ROUDER, J., ROUSSEAU, J., SAVALEI, V., SCHÖNBRODT, F.D., SELLKE, T., SINCLAIR, B., TINGLEY, D., VAN ZANDT, T., VAZIRE, S., WATTS, D.J., WINSHIP, C., WOLPERT, R.L., XIE, Y., YOUNG, C., ZINMAN, J., JOHNSON, V.E. (2018). Redefine statistical significance. In: «Nature Human Behaviour», vol. II, n. 1, pp. 6-10.

BETENSKY, R.A. (2019). The p-value requires context, not a threshold. In: «The American Statistician», vol. LXXIII, Supplement 1, pp. 115-117.

BLUME, J.D., GREEVY, R.A., WELTY, V.F., SMITH, J.R., DUPONT, W.D. (2019). An introduction to second-generation p-values. In: «The American Statisti-cian», vol. LXXIII, Supplement 1, pp. 157-167.

BYRNE, R.M.J. (2016). Counterfactual thinking. In: «Annual Review of Psychology», vol. LXVII, pp. 135-157.

FEINSTEIN, A.R. (1990). The unit fragility index: An additional appraisal of “statistical significance” for a contrast of two proportions. In: «Journal of Clinical Epidemiology», vol. XLIII, n. 9, pp. 201-209.

FRASER, D.A.S. (2019). The p-value function and statistical inference. In: «The American Statistician», vol. LXXIII, Supplement 1, pp. 135-147.

GANNON, M.A., DE BRAGANÇA PEREIRA, C.A., POLPO, A. (2019). Blending Bayesian and classical tools to define optimal sample-size-dependent significance levels. In: «The American Statistician», vol. LXXIII, Supplement 1, pp. 213-222.

GELMAN, A., CARLIN, G.B., STERN, H.S., DUNSON, D.B., VEHTARI, A., RUBIN, D.B. (2014). Bayesian data analysis, Chapman & Hall, New York.

GREENLAND, S. (2019). Valid p-values behave exactly as they should: Some misleading criticisms of p-values and their resolution with s-values. In: «The American Statistician», vol. LXXIII, Supplement 1, pp. 106-114.

HECK, D.W., BOEHM, U., BÖING-MESSING, F., BÜRKNER, P., DERKS, K., DIENES, Z., FU, Q., GU, X., KARIMOVA, D., KIERS, H., KLUGKIST, I., KUIPER, R.M., LEE, M.D., LEENDERS, R., LEPLAA, H.J., LINDE, M., LY, A., MEIJERINK-BOSMAN, M., MOERBEEK, M., MULDER, J., PALFI, B., SCHÖNBRODT, F., TENDEIRO, J., VAN DEN BERGH, D., VAN LISSA, C.J., VAN RAVENZWAAIJ, D., VANPAEMEL, W., WAGENMAKERS, E., WILLIAMS, D.R., ZONDERVAN-ZWIJNENBURG, M., HOIJTINK, H. (2022). A review of applications of the Bayes factor in psychological research. In: «Psychological Methods» – doi:10.1037/ met0000454.

HELD, L. (2019). The assessment of intrinsic credibility and a new argument for p <0.005. In: «Royal Society Open Science», vol. VI, n. 3, Art. Nr. 181534 – doi: 10.1098/rsos.181534.

HELD, L., MATTHEWS, R., OTT, M., PAWEL, S. (2021). Reverse-Bayes methods: A review of recent technical advances, arXiv preprint arXiv:2102.13443.

KEYSERSE, C., GAZZOLA, V., WAGENMAKERS, E.J. (2020). Using Bayes factor hypothesis testing in neuroscience to establish evidence of absence. In: «Nature Neuroscience», vol. XXIII, n. 7, pp. 788-799.

KRUSCHKE, J. (2018). Doing Bayesian data analysis: A tutorial with R, JAGS, and Stan. Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2nd edition.

KRUSCHKE, J.K., LIDDELL, T.M. (2018). Bayesian data analysis for newcomers. In: «Psychonomic Bulletin & Review», vol. XXV, n. 1, pp. 155-177.

LEWIS, D. (1973). Causation. In: «The Journal of Philosophy», vol. LXX, n. 17, pp. 556-567.

LUCCHINI, M. (2013). Il contributo del modello controfattuale all’irrobustimento della sociologia. In: «Quaderni di Sociologia», vol. LXII, pp. 55-76.

LY, A., STEFAN, A., VAN DOORN, J., DABLANDER, F., VAN DEN BERGH, D., SARAFOGLOU, A., KUCHARSKY, S., DERSK, K., GRONAU, Q.F., RAJ, A., BOEHM, U., VAN KESTEREN, E.-J., HINNE, M., MATZKE, D., MARSMAN, M., WAGENMAKERS, E.J. (2020). The Bayesian methodology of Sir Harold Jeffreys as a practical alternative to the p value hypothesis test. In: «Computational Brain & Behavior», vol. III, n. 2, pp. 153-161.

MARTINI, A. (2006). Metodo sperimentale, approccio controfattuale e valutazione degli effetti delle politiche pubbliche. In: «Rassegna Italiana di Valutazione», vol. XXXIV, pp. 61-74.

MATTHEWS, R.A.J. (2001). Methods for assessing the credibility of clinical trial outcomes. In: «Drug Information Journal», vol. XXXV, n. 4, pp. 1469-1478.

MATTHEWS, R.A.J. (2018). Beyond “significance”: Principles and practice of the analysis of credibility. In: «Royal Society Open Science», vol. V, n. 1, Art. Nr. 171047 – doi: 10.1098/rsos.171047.

MATTHEWS, R.A.J. (2019). Moving towards the post p < 0.05 era via the analysis of credibility. In: «The American Statistician», vol. LXXIII, pp. 202-212.

MATTHEWS, R.A.J. (2021). The p‐value statement, five years on. In: «Significance», vol. XVIII, n. 2, pp. 16-19.

MORATO, V. (2019). Controfattuali. In: «APhEx», vol. XX, pp. 1-58.

MORGAN, S.L., WINSHIP, C. (2014). Counterfactuals and causal inference, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

PEARL, L., GLYMOUR, M., JEWELL, N.P. (2016). Causal inference in statistics, Wiley, New York.

POTTER, G.E. (2020). Dismantling the fragility index: A demonstration of statistical reasoning. In: «Statistics in Medicine», vol. XXXIX, n. 26, pp. 3720-3731.

QUATTO, P., RIPAMONTI, E., MARASINI, D. (2022). Beyond p < 0.05: A critical review of new Bayesian proposal for assessing the p-value. In: «Journal of Bio-pharmaceutical Statistics», online: 4 March 2022 – doi: 10.1080/ 10543406.2021.2009497.

ROESE, N. (2009). The psychology of counterfactual thinking. In: «Historical Social Research», vol. XXXIV, n. 2, pp. 16-26.

ROSENBAUM, P.R. (2010). Design of observational studies, Springer, Berlin/New York.

ROSENBAUM, P.R., RUBIN, D.B. (1983). Assessing sensitivity to an unobserved covariate in an observational study with binary outcome. In: «Journal of the Royal Statistical Society», vol. XLV, n. 2, pp. 212-218.

ROSENBAUM, P.R., RUBIN, D.B. (1983). The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. In: «Biometrika», vol. LXX, n. 1, pp. 41-55.

RUBIN, D.B. (1974). Estimating causal effects of treatments in randomized and nonrandomized studies. In: «Journal of Educational Psychology», vol. LXVI, n. 5, pp. 688-701.

RUBIN, D.B. (2005). Causal inference using potential outcomes: Design, modeling, decisions. In: «Journal of the American Statistical Association», vol. C, n. 469, pp. 322-331.

SCOTT, M.L., BARTLETT, B. (2019). Bayesian statistics in sociology: Past, present, future. In: «Annual Review of Sociology», vol. XLV, pp. 47-68.

WAGENMAKER, E.J., VERHAGEN, J., MATZKE, D., STEINGROEVER, H., ROUDE, J.N., MOREY, R. (2017). The need for Bayesian hypothesis testing in psychological science. In: S.O. LILLIENFELD, I.D. WALDMAN (eds.). Psychological science under scrutiny, Wiley, New York, pp. 123-138.

WAGENMAKERS, E.J., MARSMAN, M., JAMIL, T., LY, A., VERHAGEN, J., LOVE, J., SELKER, R., GRONAU, Q.F., SMIRA, M., EPSKAMP, S., MATZKE, D., ROUDER, J.N., MOERY, R.D. (2018). Bayesian inference for psychology. Part I: Theoretical advantages and practical ramifications. In: «Psychonomic Bullettin & Review», vol. XXV, n. 1, pp. 35-57.

WALSH, M., SRINATHAN, S.K., MCAULEY, D.F., MRKOBRADA, M., LEVINE, O., RIBIC, C., MOLNAR, A.O., DATTANI, N.D., BURKE, A., GUTATT, G., THABANE, L., WALTER, S.D., POGUE, J., DEVERAUX, P.J. (2014). The fragility of trial results is frequently fragile: A case for a fragility index. In: «Journal of Clinical Epidemiology», vol. LXVII, n. 6, pp. 622-628.

WALTER, S.D., THABANE, L., BRIEL, M. (2020). The fragility of trial results involves more than statistical significance alone. In: «Journal of Clinical Epidemiology», vol. CXXIV, pp. 34-41.

留言 (0)

沒有登入
gif