The Most Difference in Means: A Statistic for the Strength of Null and Near-Zero Results
Bruce A. Corliss, Taylor R. Brown, Tingting Zhang, Kevin A. Janes,, Heman Shakeri, Philip E. Bourne

TL;DR
This paper introduces the most difference in means ($oldsymbol{ ext{δ}_M}$), a new statistic to quantify and test the strength of null or near-zero effect results, aiding interpretation and comparison across studies.
Contribution
The paper proposes $ ext{δ}_M$, a novel two-sample statistic that quantifies null strength and enables hypothesis testing for negligible effect sizes, improving interpretation of null results.
Findings
$ ext{δ}_M$ outperforms other statistics in comparing null strength.
The relative $ ext{δ}_M$ allows comparison across different treatments and methods.
Reporting relative $ ext{δ}_M$ may encourage publication of null results.
Abstract
Statistical insignificance does not suggest the absence of effect, yet scientists must often use null results as evidence of negligible (near-zero) effect size to falsify scientific hypotheses. Doing so must assess a result's null strength, defined as the evidence for a negligible effect size. Such an assessment would differentiate strong null results that suggest a negligible effect size from weak null results that suggest a broad range of potential effect sizes. We propose the most difference in means () as a two-sample statistic that can both quantify null strength and perform a hypothesis test for negligible effect size. To facilitate consensus when interpreting results, our statistic allows scientists to conclude that a result has negligible effect size using different thresholds with no recalculation required. To assist with selecting a threshold, can also…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Code & Models
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsMeta-analysis and systematic reviews · Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) · Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
