Cargando…

Comparison of Different Response Time Outlier Exclusion Methods: A Simulation Study

In response time (RT) research, RT outliers are typically excluded from statistical analysis to improve the signal-to-noise ratio. Nevertheless, there exist several methods for outlier exclusion. This poses the question, how these methods differ with respect to recovering the uncontaminated RT distr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Berger, Alexander, Kiefer, Markus
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8238084/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34194371
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.675558
_version_ 1783714837584412672
author Berger, Alexander
Kiefer, Markus
author_facet Berger, Alexander
Kiefer, Markus
author_sort Berger, Alexander
collection PubMed
description In response time (RT) research, RT outliers are typically excluded from statistical analysis to improve the signal-to-noise ratio. Nevertheless, there exist several methods for outlier exclusion. This poses the question, how these methods differ with respect to recovering the uncontaminated RT distribution. In the present simulation study, two RT distributions with a given population difference were simulated in each iteration. RTs were replaced by outliers following two different approaches. The first approach generated outliers at the tails of the distribution, the second one inserted outliers overlapping with the genuine RT distribution. We applied ten different outlier exclusion methods and tested, how many pairs of distributions significantly differed. Outlier exclusion methods were compared in terms of bias. Bias was defined as the deviation of the proportion of significant differences after outlier exclusion from the proportion of significant differences in the uncontaminated samples (before introducing outliers). Our results showed large differences in bias between the exclusion methods. Some methods showed a high rate of Type-I errors and should therefore clearly not be used. Overall, our results showed that applying an exclusion method based on z-scores / standard deviations introduced only small biases, while the absence of outlier exclusion showed the largest absolute bias.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8238084
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82380842021-06-29 Comparison of Different Response Time Outlier Exclusion Methods: A Simulation Study Berger, Alexander Kiefer, Markus Front Psychol Psychology In response time (RT) research, RT outliers are typically excluded from statistical analysis to improve the signal-to-noise ratio. Nevertheless, there exist several methods for outlier exclusion. This poses the question, how these methods differ with respect to recovering the uncontaminated RT distribution. In the present simulation study, two RT distributions with a given population difference were simulated in each iteration. RTs were replaced by outliers following two different approaches. The first approach generated outliers at the tails of the distribution, the second one inserted outliers overlapping with the genuine RT distribution. We applied ten different outlier exclusion methods and tested, how many pairs of distributions significantly differed. Outlier exclusion methods were compared in terms of bias. Bias was defined as the deviation of the proportion of significant differences after outlier exclusion from the proportion of significant differences in the uncontaminated samples (before introducing outliers). Our results showed large differences in bias between the exclusion methods. Some methods showed a high rate of Type-I errors and should therefore clearly not be used. Overall, our results showed that applying an exclusion method based on z-scores / standard deviations introduced only small biases, while the absence of outlier exclusion showed the largest absolute bias. Frontiers Media S.A. 2021-06-14 /pmc/articles/PMC8238084/ /pubmed/34194371 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.675558 Text en Copyright © 2021 Berger and Kiefer. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Psychology
Berger, Alexander
Kiefer, Markus
Comparison of Different Response Time Outlier Exclusion Methods: A Simulation Study
title Comparison of Different Response Time Outlier Exclusion Methods: A Simulation Study
title_full Comparison of Different Response Time Outlier Exclusion Methods: A Simulation Study
title_fullStr Comparison of Different Response Time Outlier Exclusion Methods: A Simulation Study
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Different Response Time Outlier Exclusion Methods: A Simulation Study
title_short Comparison of Different Response Time Outlier Exclusion Methods: A Simulation Study
title_sort comparison of different response time outlier exclusion methods: a simulation study
topic Psychology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8238084/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34194371
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.675558
work_keys_str_mv AT bergeralexander comparisonofdifferentresponsetimeoutlierexclusionmethodsasimulationstudy
AT kiefermarkus comparisonofdifferentresponsetimeoutlierexclusionmethodsasimulationstudy