ArticlePerspectives on behavior science2019
An Information Theoretic Approach to Model Selection: A Tutorial with Monte Carlo Confirmation.
Article in Perspectives on behavior science, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluating the influence of C/t on sensitivity to relative S+ production rate.Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior · 2026Article
- Retinal Cx36 gap junctions in the inner and outer plexiform layers differentially control visual thresholds.iScience · 2026Article
- Opportunities for machine learning and artificial intelligence in physiologically-based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling.Advanced drug delivery reviews · 2025Review
- Abstinence as Choice: Exploring Voluntary Abstinence from Alcohol Self-Administration Using the Resurgence-as-Choice Framework.Perspectives on behavior science · 2024Article
- Meta-Analytic Methods to Detect Publication Bias in Behavior Science Research.Perspectives on behavior science · 2022Article
- Associations between fecal cortisol and biparental care in a pair-living primate.American journal of physical anthropology · 2021Article
- Methylmercury, attention, and memory: baseline-dependent effects of adult d-amphetamine and marginal effects of adolescent methylmercury.Neurotoxicology · 2020Article
- Adolescent methylmercury exposure alters short-term remembering, but not sustained attention, in male Long-Evans rats.Neurotoxicology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A reliance on null hypothesis significance testing (NHST) and misinterpretations of its results are thought to contribute to the replication crisis while impeding the development of a cumulative science. One solution is a data-analytic approach called Information-Theoretic (I-T) Model Selection, which builds upon Maximum Likelihood estimates. In the I-T approach, the scientist examines a set of candidate models and determines for each one the probability that it is the closer to the truth than all others in the set. Although the theoretical development is subtle, the implementation of I-T analysis is straightforward. Models are sorted according to the probability that they are the best in light of the data collected. It encourages the examination of multiple models, something investigators desire and that NHST discourages. This article is structured to address two objectives. The first is to illustrate the application of I-T data analysis to data from a virtual experiment. A noisy delay-discounting data set is generated and seven quantitative models are examined. In the illustration, it is demonstrated that it is not necessary to know the "truth" is to identify the one that is closest to it and that the most likely models conform to the model that generated the data. Second, we examine claims made by advocates of the I-T approach using Monte Carlo simulations in which 10,000 different data sets are generated and analyzed. The simulations showed that 1) the probabilities associated with each model returned by the single virtual experiment approximated those that resulted from the simulations, 2) models that were deemed close to the truth produced the most precise parameter estimates, and 3) adding a single replicate sharpens the ability to identify the most probable model.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.