Abstract
Recent studies indicate that rehabilitation researchers frequently include multiple tests of significance in their investigations. This study examined the possibility that the Type I error rate in rehabilitation research is inflated due to the inappropriate analysis of data from multiple significance tests. The incidence of Type I error was computed for a sample of rehabilitation research. The results revealed a Type I error rate substantially higher than the traditionally assumed level of 5% (p<.05). The argument is made that methods to determine the rate of Type I error should be routinely used in rehabilitation research.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 170-173 |
| Number of pages | 4 |
| Journal | Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation |
| Volume | 69 |
| Issue number | 3 I |
| State | Published - 1988 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Fingerprint
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Rehabilitation
Cite this
Multiplicity in rehabilitation research : A quantitative assessment. / Ottenbacher, Kenneth.
In: Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Vol. 69, No. 3 I, 1988, p. 170-173.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Multiplicity in rehabilitation research
T2 - A quantitative assessment
AU - Ottenbacher, Kenneth
PY - 1988
Y1 - 1988
N2 - Recent studies indicate that rehabilitation researchers frequently include multiple tests of significance in their investigations. This study examined the possibility that the Type I error rate in rehabilitation research is inflated due to the inappropriate analysis of data from multiple significance tests. The incidence of Type I error was computed for a sample of rehabilitation research. The results revealed a Type I error rate substantially higher than the traditionally assumed level of 5% (p<.05). The argument is made that methods to determine the rate of Type I error should be routinely used in rehabilitation research.
AB - Recent studies indicate that rehabilitation researchers frequently include multiple tests of significance in their investigations. This study examined the possibility that the Type I error rate in rehabilitation research is inflated due to the inappropriate analysis of data from multiple significance tests. The incidence of Type I error was computed for a sample of rehabilitation research. The results revealed a Type I error rate substantially higher than the traditionally assumed level of 5% (p<.05). The argument is made that methods to determine the rate of Type I error should be routinely used in rehabilitation research.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0023876419&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0023876419&partnerID=8YFLogxK
M3 - Article
VL - 69
SP - 170
EP - 173
JO - Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
JF - Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
SN - 0003-9993
IS - 3 I
ER -