IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/amstat/v73y2019is1p213-222.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Blending Bayesian and Classical Tools to Define Optimal Sample-Size-Dependent Significance Levels

Author

Listed:
  • Mark Andrew Gannon
  • Carlos Alberto de Bragança Pereira
  • Adriano Polpo

Abstract

This article argues that researchers do not need to completely abandon the p-value, the best-known significance index, but should instead stop using significance levels that do not depend on sample sizes. A testing procedure is developed using a mixture of frequentist and Bayesian tools, with a significance level that is a function of sample size, obtained from a generalized form of the Neyman–Pearson Lemma that minimizes a linear combination of α, the probability of rejecting a true null hypothesis, and β, the probability of failing to reject a false null, instead of fixing α and minimizing β. The resulting hypothesis tests do not violate the Likelihood Principle and do not require any constraints on the dimensionalities of the sample space and parameter space. The procedure includes an ordering of the entire sample space and uses predictive probability (density) functions, allowing for testing of both simple and compound hypotheses. Accessible examples are presented to highlight specific characteristics of the new tests.

Suggested Citation

  • Mark Andrew Gannon & Carlos Alberto de Bragança Pereira & Adriano Polpo, 2019. "Blending Bayesian and Classical Tools to Define Optimal Sample-Size-Dependent Significance Levels," The American Statistician, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 73(S1), pages 213-222, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:amstat:v:73:y:2019:i:s1:p:213-222
    DOI: 10.1080/00031305.2018.1518268
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00031305.2018.1518268
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00031305.2018.1518268?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:taf:amstat:v:73:y:2019:i:s1:p:213-222. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/UTAS20 .

    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.