title: Must psychologists change the way they analyze their data?
abstract: Wagenmakers, Wetzels, Borsboom, and van der Maas (2011) argued that psychologists should replace the familiar "frequentist" statistical analyses of their data with bayesian analyses. To illustrate their argument, they reanalyzed a set of psi experiments published recently in this journal by Bem (2011), maintaining that, contrary to his conclusion, his data do not yield evidence in favor of the psi hypothesis. We argue that they have incorrectly selected an unrealistic prior distribution for their analysis and that a bayesian analysis using a more reasonable distribution yields strong evidence in favor of the psi hypothesis. More generally, we argue that there are advantages to bayesian analyses that merit their increased use in the future. However, as Wagenmakers et al.'s analysis inadvertently revealed, they contain hidden traps that must be better understood before being more widely substituted for the familiar frequentist analyses currently employed by most research psychologists.
authors.affiliation: Department of Psychology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA. d.bem@cornell.edu
authors.forename: Daryl J
authors.initials: DJ
authors.lastname: Bem
authors.forename: Jessica
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Utts
authors.forename: Wesley O
authors.initials: WO
authors.lastname: Johnson
mesh_terms: D003627:Data Interpretation, Statistical; D006801:Humans; D011584:Psychology / Q000379:methods*