In:
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science (PLoS), Vol. 17, No. 7 ( 2022-7-20), p. e0271668-
Abstract:
How to correctly interpret interaction effects has been largely discussed in scientific literature. Nevertheless, misinterpretations are still frequently observed, and neuroscience is not exempt from this trend. We reviewed 645 papers published from 2019 to 2020 and found that, in the 93.2% of studies reporting a statistically significant interaction effect (N = 221), post-hoc pairwise comparisons were the designated method adopted to interpret its results. Given the widespread use of this approach, we aim to: (1) highlight its limitations and how it can lead to misinterpretations of the interaction effect; (2) discuss more effective and powerful ways to correctly interpret interaction effects, including both explorative and model selection procedures. The paper provides practical examples and freely accessible online materials to reproduce all analyses.
Type of Medium:
Online Resource
ISSN:
1932-6203
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0271668
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0271668.g001
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0271668.g002
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0271668.g003
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0271668.g004
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0271668.g005
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0271668.g006
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0271668.t001
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0271668.t002
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0271668.t003
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0271668.t004
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0271668.r001
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0271668.r002
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0271668.r003
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0271668.r004
Language:
English
Publisher:
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Publication Date:
2022
detail.hit.zdb_id:
2267670-3
Permalink