Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34435309›Full record

ArticlePsychometrika2021

A Group Comparison Test under Uncertain Group Membership.

Tobias A Bauer, Alexandro Folster, Tina Braun, Timo von Oertzen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychometrika, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Tobias A BauerUniversity of the BUNDESWEHR, MUNICH, Munich, Neubiberg, Germany.
Alexandro FolsterUniversity of the BUNDESWEHR, MUNICH, Munich, Neubiberg, Germany.
Tina BraunUniversity of the BUNDESWEHR, MUNICH, Munich, Neubiberg, Germany. tina.braun@unibw.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5901-910X
Timo von OertzenUniversity of the BUNDESWEHR, MUNICH, Munich, Neubiberg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

An overwhelming majority of articles in psychology compare means, often between multiple groups. However, sometimes we do not know the exact group membership, but only a probability to be in one of the groups. Such information may come from classifiers trained on other datasets, prevalence of group memberships for some parts of the sample, multi-level situations where the group membership is only known as a ratio in an upper level, or expert ratings (e.g., whether a person has a pathological condition or not). We present a simple method that allows to compare group means in the absence of exact knowledge about group membership and investigate the loss of information depending on the probability values theoretically and in a large-scale simulation.

Indexed as

Group ProcessesComputer SimulationHumansProbabilityPsychometricsUncertaintygroup uncertaintyt test

Identifiers

PMID34435309
PMCPMC8636443

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.