Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32601411›Full record

ReviewNature neuroscience2020

Using Bayes factor hypothesis testing in neuroscience to establish evidence of absence.

Christian Keysers, Valeria Gazzola, Eric-Jan Wagenmakers

Erratum issuedAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Nature neuroscience, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 329 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
329citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

329 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Article
  16. Uncovering Latent Cognitive, Metacognitive, and Neural Bases of Problem-Solving Deficits in Children with Developmental Dyscalculia.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2026
    Article
  17. Weighting of Spectral and Temporal Cues with n-of-m Cochlear Implant Strategies Depends on Voice Pitch.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2026
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

269 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Christian KeysersNetherlands Institute for Neuroscience, Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. c.keysers@nin.knaw.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2845-5467
Valeria GazzolaNetherlands Institute for Neuroscience, Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Eric-Jan WagenmakersDepartment of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1596-1034

Funding

European Research Council 758703
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Most neuroscientists would agree that for brain research to progress, we have to know which experimental manipulations have no effect as much as we must identify those that do have an effect. The dominant statistical approaches used in neuroscience rely on P values and can establish the latter but not the former. This makes non-significant findings difficult to interpret: do they support the null hypothesis or are they simply not informative? Here we show how Bayesian hypothesis testing can be used in neuroscience studies to establish both whether there is evidence of absence and whether there is absence of evidence. Through simple tutorial-style examples of Bayesian t-tests and ANOVA using the open-source project JASP, this article aims to empower neuroscientists to use this approach to provide compelling and rigorous evidence for the absence of an effect.

Indexed as

Bayes TheoremAnimalsBrainHumansNeurosciencesResearch Design

Identifiers

PMID32601411
PMCPMC7610527

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.