Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39511109›Full record

ReviewPsychonomic bulletin & review2025

Model-averaged Bayesian t tests.

Maximilian Maier, František Bartoš, Daniel S Quintana, Fabian Dablander, Don van den Bergh, Maarten Marsman, Alexander Ly, Eric-Jan Wagenmakers

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
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

8 authors.

Maximilian Maier *Department of Experimental Psychology, University College London, 26 Bedford Way 129-B, WC1H 0AP, London, UK. maximilian.maier.20@ucl.ac.uk.
František Bartoš *Department of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Daniel S QuintanaDepartment of Psychology, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Fabian DablanderInstitute for Advanced Study, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Don van den BerghDepartment of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Maarten MarsmanDepartment of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Alexander LyDepartment of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Eric-Jan WagenmakersDepartment of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

EPA EP-C-17-017H2020 European Research Council 743086 UNIFYNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek 16.Vici.170.083, 451-17-017
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

One of the most common statistical analyses in experimental psychology concerns the comparison of two means using the frequentist t test. However, frequentist t tests do not quantify evidence and require various assumption tests. Recently, popularized Bayesian t tests do quantify evidence, but these were developed for scenarios where the two populations are assumed to have the same variance. As an alternative to both methods, we outline a comprehensive t test framework based on Bayesian model averaging. This new t test framework simultaneously takes into account models that assume equal and unequal variances, and models that use t-likelihoods to improve robustness to outliers. The resulting inference is based on a weighted average across the entire model ensemble, with higher weights assigned to models that predicted the observed data well. This new t test framework provides an integrated approach to assumption checks and inference by applying a series of pertinent models to the data simultaneously rather than sequentially. The integrated Bayesian model-averaged t tests achieve robustness without having to commit to a single model following a series of assumption checks. To facilitate practical applications, we provide user-friendly implementations in JASP and via the

Indexed as

Models, StatisticalPsychology, ExperimentalBayes TheoremData Interpretation, StatisticalHumansBayes factorBayesian model-averagingRobust inferencet-likelihoodt testUnequal variances

Identifiers

PMID39511109
PMCPMC12092555

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.