Errores de interpretación de los métodos estadísticos: importancia y recomendaciones

Psicothema, ISSN 0214-9915, Vol. 18, Nº. 4, 2006, pags. 848-856 01/2006;
Source: OAI

ABSTRACT Trabajos empíricos previos han identificado las opiniones de los investigadores respecto de las pruebas de significación y de otros recursos estadísticos, algunas de estas opiniones resultan totalmente inaceptables. En esta investigación comprobamos el grado en que estos errores aparecen en una muestra española de profesores e investigadores de universidad mediante la aplicación de un cuestionario. Los datos obtenidos son importantes para: a) la prevención de interpretaciones inadecuadas; b) la corrección de usos incorrectos; c) el análisis de alternativas posibles; y d) proponer cambios editoriales en los criterios de publicación.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The present article deals with the controversy about null hypothesis significance testing (NHST) that currently exists in psychological research. The main criticisms and counter-criticisms posed by its detractors and supporters are presented. Alternatives have been proposed to replace or complement the NHST, as recommended by the Task Force on Statistical Inference of the APA, and these are explained. Furthermore, the procedure for calculating these alternatives using SPSS statistical software in a two-way between-factor design is demonstrated. Thus, an attempt is made to provide the applied researcher with resources that make it possible to analyse and interpret the results of any research study using a group of indicators that lends a high level of validity to the statistical inference performed.
    Psicothema 03/2009; 21(1):141-51. · 0.96 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The generation of scientific knowledge in Psychology has made significant headway over the last decades, as the number of articles published in high impact journals has risen substantially. Breakthroughs in our understanding of the phenomena under study demand a better theoretical elaboration of work hypotheses, efficient application of research designs, and special rigour concerning the use of statistical methodology. Anyway, a rise in productivity does not always mean the achievement of high scientific standards. On the whole, statistical use may entail a source of negative effects on the quality of research, both due to (1) the degree of difficulty inherent to some methods to be understood and applied and (2) the commission of a series of errors and mainly the omission of key information needed to assess the adequacy of the analyses carried out. Despite the existence of noteworthy studies in the literature aimed at criticising these misuses (published specifically as improvement guides), the occurrence of statistical malpractice has to be overcome. Given the growing complexity of theories put forward in Psychology in general and in Clinical and Health Psychology in particular, the likelihood of these errors has increased. Therefore, the primary aim of this work is to provide a set of key statistical recommendations for authors to apply appropriate standards of methodological rigour, and for reviewers to be firm when it comes to demanding a series of sine qua non conditions for the publication of papers.
    Clínica y Salud. 03/2013; 24(1):47-54.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A programme of educational innovation was implemented to improve the attitude toward research methods for psychology students. Students used real data to test their own hypotheses using different statistical methods. Specifically, they implemented two key methodological principles in research methods: sample size and ordinal claims (Frick, 1996). Students had to work in teams, using Internet data bases for developing the theoretical background of the study, the definition of the objectives, the definition of variables, data analysis, and discussion of results. We assessed the attitudes towards research methods before and after the study. Results showed that: 1) the students improved their skills in research methods, and 2) the attitudes towards methodology were more positive.
    Escritos de Psicología (Internet). 12/2010; 3(4):1-10.

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
May 28, 2014