The interpretation of scholars' interpretations of confidence intervals: criticism, replication, and extension of Hoekstra et al. (2014)

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorGarcía Pérez, Miguel Angel
dc.contributor.authorAlcalá Quintana, Rocío
dc.date.accessioned2023-06-18T06:56:58Z
dc.date.available2023-06-18T06:56:58Z
dc.date.issued2016-07-08
dc.description.abstractHoekstra et al. (Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2014, 21:1157–1164) surveyed the interpretation of confidence intervals (CIs) by first-year students, master students, and researchers with six items expressing misinterpretations of CIs. They asked respondents to answer all items, computed the number of items endorsed, and concluded that misinterpretation of CIs is robust across groups. Their design may have produced this outcome artifactually for reasons that we describe. This paper discusses first the two interpretations of CIs and, hence, why misinterpretation cannot be inferred from endorsement of some of the items. Next, a re-analysis of Hoekstra et al.’s data reveals some puzzling differences between first-year and master students that demand further investigation. For that purpose, we designed a replication study with an extended questionnaire including two additional items that express correct interpretations of CIs (to compare endorsement of correct vs. nominally incorrect interpretations) and we asked master students to indicate which items they would have omitted had they had the option (to distinguish deliberate from uninformed endorsement caused by the forced-response format). Results showed that incognizant first-year students endorsed correct and nominally incorrect items identically, revealing that the two item types are not differentially attractive superficially; in contrast, master students were distinctively more prone to endorsing correct items when their uninformed responses were removed, although they admitted to nescience more often that might have been expected. Implications for teaching practices are discussed.
dc.description.departmentDepto. de Psicobiología y Metodología en Ciencias del Comportamiento
dc.description.facultyFac. de Psicología
dc.description.refereedTRUE
dc.description.sponsorshipMinisterio de Economía y Competitividad (MINECO)
dc.description.statuspub
dc.eprint.idhttps://eprints.ucm.es/id/eprint/39473
dc.identifier.doidoi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01042
dc.identifier.issn1664-1078
dc.identifier.officialurlhttp://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01042
dc.identifier.relatedurlhttp://journal.frontiersin.org/journal/psychology
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/24651
dc.issue.number1042
dc.journal.titleFrontiers in psychology
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherFrontiers Media
dc.relation.projectIDPSI2012-32903
dc.relation.projectIDPSI2015-67162-P
dc.rightsAtribución 3.0 España
dc.rights.accessRightsopen access
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/es/
dc.subject.cdu159.9.072
dc.subject.keywordMethod bias
dc.subject.keywordConfidence intervals
dc.subject.keywordHypothesis testing
dc.subject.keywordParameter estimation
dc.subject.keywordStatistical education
dc.subject.keywordSesgo del método
dc.subject.keywordLos intervalos de confianza
dc.subject.keywordPruebas de hipótesis
dc.subject.keywordEstimación de parámetros
dc.subject.keywordEducación estadística
dc.subject.ucmPsicología experimental
dc.subject.unesco6106 Psicología Experimental
dc.titleThe interpretation of scholars' interpretations of confidence intervals: criticism, replication, and extension of Hoekstra et al. (2014)
dc.typejournal article
dc.volume.number7
dspace.entity.typePublication
relation.isAuthorOfPublication0a7dbcf6-8a0b-4b47-91af-79bb5db7bb52
relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscovery0a7dbcf6-8a0b-4b47-91af-79bb5db7bb52
Download
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Alcalá-Quintana Interpretation of Scholars' Interpretations of Confidence Intervals .pdf
Size:
1.64 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
downoload Download
Collections
Artículos