Why psychologists must change the way they analyze their data: the case of psi: comment on Bem (2011)
- PMID: 21280965
- DOI: 10.1037/a0022790
Why psychologists must change the way they analyze their data: the case of psi: comment on Bem (2011)
Abstract
Does psi exist? D. J. Bem (2011) conducted 9 studies with over 1,000 participants in an attempt to demonstrate that future events retroactively affect people's responses. Here we discuss several limitations of Bem's experiments on psi; in particular, we show that the data analysis was partly exploratory and that one-sided p values may overstate the statistical evidence against the null hypothesis. We reanalyze Bem's data with a default Bayesian t test and show that the evidence for psi is weak to nonexistent. We argue that in order to convince a skeptical audience of a controversial claim, one needs to conduct strictly confirmatory studies and analyze the results with statistical tests that are conservative rather than liberal. We conclude that Bem's p values do not indicate evidence in favor of precognition; instead, they indicate that experimental psychologists need to change the way they conduct their experiments and analyze their data.
(c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved
Comment in
-
Editorial comment.J Pers Soc Psychol. 2011 Mar;100(3):406. doi: 10.1037/0022789. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2011. PMID: 21280969 No abstract available.
-
Must psychologists change the way they analyze their data?J Pers Soc Psychol. 2011 Oct;101(4):716-9. doi: 10.1037/a0024777. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2011. PMID: 21928916
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
