IV. Clinical Psychology: Research/Practice

Misconceptions about the assumptions behind the standard linear regression model are widespread and dangerous. These lead to using linear regression when inappropriate, and to employing alternative procedures with less statistical power when unnecessary. Our systematic literature review investigated employment and reporting of assumption checks in twelve clinical psychology journals. Findings indicate that normality of the variables themselves, rather than of the errors, was wrongfully held for a necessary assumption in 4% of papers that use regression. Furthermore, 92% of all papers using linear regression were unclear about their assumption checks, violating APA-recommendations. This paper appeals for a heightened awareness for and increased transparency in the reporting of statistical assumption checking.

Download Full-text

Peer Review #1 of "Regression assumptions in clinical psychology research practice—a systematic review of common misconceptions (v0.2)"

10.7287/peerj.3323v0.2/reviews/1 ◽

2017 ◽

Author(s):

M Williams

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Peer Review ◽

Clinical Psychology ◽

Psychology Research ◽

Research Practice ◽

Common Misconceptions

Download Full-text

Regression assumptions in clinical psychology research practice - A systematic review of common misconceptions

10.7287/peerj.preprints.2602v1 ◽

2016 ◽

Author(s):

Anja Franziska Ernst ◽

Casper J Albers

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Linear Regression ◽

Literature Review ◽

Clinical Psychology ◽

Statistical Power ◽

Psychology Research ◽

Research Practice ◽

Standard Linear ◽

Alternative Procedures ◽

Common Misconceptions

Misconceptions about the assumptions behind the standard linear regression model are widespread and dangerous. These lead to using linear regression when inappropriate, and to employing alternative procedures with less statistical power when unnecessary. Our systematic literature review investigated employment and reporting of assumption checks in twelve clinical psychology journals. The selected journals were representative based on impact factor. Findings indicate that normality of the variables themselves, rather than of the residuals, was wrongfully held for a necessary assumption in 4% of papers that use regression. Furthermore, 92% of all papers using linear regression were unclear about their assumption checks, violating APA-recommendations. This paper appeals for a heightened awareness for and increased transparency in the reporting of statistical assumption checking.

Download Full-text

Regression assumptions in clinical psychology research practice - A systematic review of common misconceptions

10.7287/peerj.preprints.2602 ◽

2016 ◽

Author(s):

Anja Franziska Ernst ◽

Casper J Albers

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Linear Regression ◽

Literature Review ◽

Clinical Psychology ◽

Statistical Power ◽

Psychology Research ◽

Research Practice ◽

Standard Linear ◽

Alternative Procedures ◽

Common Misconceptions

Misconceptions about the assumptions behind the standard linear regression model are widespread and dangerous. These lead to using linear regression when inappropriate, and to employing alternative procedures with less statistical power when unnecessary. Our systematic literature review investigated employment and reporting of assumption checks in twelve clinical psychology journals. The selected journals were representative based on impact factor. Findings indicate that normality of the variables themselves, rather than of the residuals, was wrongfully held for a necessary assumption in 4% of papers that use regression. Furthermore, 92% of all papers using linear regression were unclear about their assumption checks, violating APA-recommendations. This paper appeals for a heightened awareness for and increased transparency in the reporting of statistical assumption checking.

Download Full-text