Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41130796›Full record

ArticleeNeuro2025

Using Simulations to Explore Sampling Distributions: An Antidote to Hasty and Extravagant Inferences.

Guillaume A Rousselet

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in eNeuro, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

1 author.

Guillaume A RousseletSchool of Neuroscience & Psychology, University of Glasgow, United Kingdom Guillaume.Rousselet@glasgow.ac.uk.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0006-8729

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Most statistical inferences in neuroscience and psychology are based on frequentist statistics, which rely on sampling distributions: the long-run outcomes of multiple experiments, given a certain model. Yet, sampling distributions are poorly understood and rarely explicitly considered when making inferences. In this tutorial and commentary, I demonstrate how to use simulations to illustrate sampling distributions to answer simple practical questions: for instance, if we could run thousands of experiments, what would the outcome look like? What do these simulations tell us about the results from a single experiment? Such simulations can be run a priori, given expected results, or a posteriori, using existing datasets. Both approaches can help make explicit the data generating process and the sources of variability; they also reveal the large uncertainty in our experimental estimation and lead to the sobering realization that, in most situations, we should not make a big deal out of results from a single experiment. Simulations can also help demonstrate how the selection of effect sizes conditional on some arbitrary cutoff (

Indexed as

Computer SimulationNeurosciencesData Interpretation, StatisticalHumansResearch DesigncorrelationERPestimationmeasurement precisionreaction timesstatistical power

Identifiers

PMID41130796
PMCPMC12549070

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.