IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pbio00/3002423.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Finding the right power balance: Better study design and collaboration can reduce dependence on statistical power

Author

Listed:
  • Shinichi Nakagawa
  • Malgorzata Lagisz
  • Yefeng Yang
  • Szymon M Drobniak

Abstract

Power analysis currently dominates sample size determination for experiments, particularly in grant and ethics applications. Yet, this focus could paradoxically result in suboptimal study design because publication biases towards studies with the largest effects can lead to the overestimation of effect sizes. In this Essay, we propose a paradigm shift towards better study designs that focus less on statistical power. We also advocate for (pre)registration and obligatory reporting of all results (regardless of statistical significance), better facilitation of team science and multi-institutional collaboration that incorporates heterogenization, and the use of prospective and living meta-analyses to generate generalizable results. Such changes could make science more effective and, potentially, more equitable, helping to cultivate better collaborations.Statistical power analysis currently dominates experimental design. In this Essay, the authors argue that we should move away from the current focus on power analysis and instead encourage smaller scale studies and collaborative projects.

Suggested Citation

  • Shinichi Nakagawa & Malgorzata Lagisz & Yefeng Yang & Szymon M Drobniak, 2024. "Finding the right power balance: Better study design and collaboration can reduce dependence on statistical power," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 22(1), pages 1-17, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pbio00:3002423
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3002423
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.3002423
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.3002423&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pbio.3002423?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shinichi Nakagawa & Edward R. Ivimey-Cook & Matthew J. Grainger & Rose E. O’Dea & Samantha Burke & Szymon M. Drobniak & Elliot Gould & Erin L. Macartney & April Robin Martinig & Kyle Morrison & Matthi, 2023. "Method Reporting with Initials for Transparency (MeRIT) promotes more granularity and accountability for author contributions," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-5, December.
    2. repec:plo:pbio00:2005413 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Christopher Allen & David M A Mehler, 2019. "Open science challenges, benefits and tips in early career and beyond," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(5), pages 1-14, May.
    4. Valentin Amrhein & David Trafimow & Sander Greenland, 2019. "Inferential Statistics as Descriptive Statistics: There Is No Replication Crisis if We Don’t Expect Replication," The American Statistician, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 73(S1), pages 262-270, March.
    5. repec:plo:pbio00:3000587 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. John P. A. Ioannidis & T. D. Stanley & Hristos Doucouliagos, 2017. "The Power of Bias in Economics Research," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 127(605), pages 236-265, October.
    7. Ronald L. Wasserstein & Allen L. Schirm & Nicole A. Lazar, 2019. "Moving to a World Beyond “p," The American Statistician, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 73(S1), pages 1-19, March.
    8. Langdalen, Henrik & Abrahamsen, Eirik Bjorheim & Selvik, Jon Tømmerås, 2020. "On the importance of systems thinking when using the ALARP principle for risk management," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 204(C).
    9. Nicholas A. Coles & Lisa M. DeBruine & Flavio Azevedo & Heidi A. Baumgartner & Michael C. Frank, 2023. "‘Big team’ science challenges us to reconsider authorship," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 7(5), pages 665-667, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Markku Maula & Wouter Stam, 2020. "Enhancing Rigor in Quantitative Entrepreneurship Research," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 44(6), pages 1059-1090, November.
    2. Vu, Patrick, 2024. "Why are replication rates so low?," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 245(1).
    3. Fukś Maksymilian & Wiejaczka Łukasz, 2025. "Climatic Determinants of Changes in the Ice Regime of Carpathian Rivers," Quaestiones Geographicae, Sciendo, vol. 44(1), pages 131-143.
    4. Olivier Bargain & Victor Stephane & Jérôme Valette, 2022. "Another brick in the wall. Immigration and electoral preferences: Direct evidence from state ballots," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(5), pages 1452-1477, November.
    5. Obsa Urgessa Ayana & Jima Degaga, 2022. "Effects of rural electrification on household welfare: a meta-regression analysis," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 69(2), pages 209-261, June.
    6. Erik Johannesson & James A. Ohlson & Sophia Weihuan Zhai, 2024. "The explanatory power of explanatory variables," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 29(4), pages 3053-3083, December.
    7. Josef C. Brada & Ichiro Iwasaki, 2022. "The Effect of Target-Country Institutions on Cross-Border Merger and Acquisition Activity: A Quantitative Literature Survey," Econometric Research in Finance, SGH Warsaw School of Economics, Collegium of Economic Analysis, vol. 7(1), pages 1-70.
    8. Holla,Alaka & Bendini,Maria Magdalena & Dinarte Diaz,Lelys Ileana & Trako,Iva, 2021. "Is Investment in Preprimary Education Too Low ? Lessons from (Quasi) ExperimentalEvidence across Countries," Policy Research Working Paper Series 9723, The World Bank.
    9. Jules Gazeaud & Victor Stephane, 2023. "Productive Workfare? Evidence from Ethiopia's Productive Safety Net Program," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 105(1), pages 265-290, January.
    10. Jennifer Elena Feichtmayer & Klaus Gründler, 2021. "Global Evidence on Misperceptions and Preferences for Redistribution," CESifo Working Paper Series 9381, CESifo.
    11. Stanley, T. D. & Doucouliagos, Chris, 2019. "Practical Significance, Meta-Analysis and the Credibility of Economics," IZA Discussion Papers 12458, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    12. Philipp Heimberger, 2022. "Does economic globalisation promote economic growth? A meta‐analysis," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(6), pages 1690-1712, June.
    13. Anna Sokolova, 2023. "Marginal Propensity to Consume and Unemployment: a Meta-analysis," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 51, pages 813-846, December.
    14. Jindrich Matousek & Tomas Havranek & Zuzana Irsova, 2022. "Individual discount rates: a meta-analysis of experimental evidence," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(1), pages 318-358, February.
    15. Assmann, Daisy & Ehrl, Philipp, 2021. "Individualistic culture and entrepreneurial opportunities," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 1248-1268.
    16. Gruener, Sven, 2019. "An empirical study on Internet-based false news stories: experiences, problem awareness, and responsibilities," SocArXiv xbez9, Center for Open Science.
    17. Nick Huntington‐Klein & Andreu Arenas & Emily Beam & Marco Bertoni & Jeffrey R. Bloem & Pralhad Burli & Naibin Chen & Paul Grieco & Godwin Ekpe & Todd Pugatch & Martin Saavedra & Yaniv Stopnitzky, 2021. "The influence of hidden researcher decisions in applied microeconomics," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 59(3), pages 944-960, July.
    18. Christopher Snyder & Ran Zhuo, 2018. "Sniff Tests as a Screen in the Publication Process: Throwing out the Wheat with the Chaff," NBER Working Papers 25058, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Dominika Ehrenbergerová & Martin Hodula & Zuzana Gric, 2022. "Does capital-based regulation affect bank pricing policy?," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 61(2), pages 135-167, April.
    20. Mattia Filomena & Matteo Picchio, 2023. "Retirement and health outcomes in a meta‐analytical framework," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(4), pages 1120-1155, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pbio00:3002423. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosbiology (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.