Bayesian p-curve mixture models as a tool to dissociate effect size and effect prevalence

Much research in the behavioral sciences aims to characterize the "typical" person. A statistically significant group-averaged effect size is often interpreted as evidence that the typical person shows an effect, but that is only true under certain distributional assumptions for which explicit evidence is rarely presented. Mean effect size varies with both within-participant effect size and population prevalence (proportion of population showing effect). Few studies consider how prevalence affects mean effect size estimates and existing estimators of prevalence are, conversely, confounded by uncertainty about effect size. We introduce a widely applicable Bayesian method, the p-curve mixture model, that jointly estimates prevalence and effect size by probabilistically clustering participant-level data based on their likelihood under a null distribution. Our approach, for which we provide a software tool, outperforms existing prevalence estimation methods when effect size is uncertain and is sensitive to differences in prevalence or effect size across groups or conditions.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Communications Psychology
Published
2025-01-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s44271-025-00190-0
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Mental Health Research Topics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.24

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Bayesian p-curve mixture models as a tool to dissociate effect size and effect prevalence

Howard C. Nusbaum, John P. Veillette
4 citations
Communications Psychology
Mental Health Research Topics
4.24
article

Bayesian p-curve mixture models as a tool to dissociate effect size and effect prevalence

Howard C. Nusbaum, John P. Veillette
article en
4 citations

Abstract

Much research in the behavioral sciences aims to characterize the "typical" person. A statistically significant group-averaged effect size is often interpreted as evidence that the typical person shows an effect, but that is only true under certain distributional assumptions for which explicit evidence is rarely presented. Mean effect size varies with both within-participant effect size and population prevalence (proportion of population showing effect). Few studies consider how prevalence affects mean effect size estimates and existing estimators of prevalence are, conversely, confounded by uncertainty about effect size. We introduce a widely applicable Bayesian method, the p-curve mixture model, that jointly estimates prevalence and effect size by probabilistically clustering participant-level data based on their likelihood under a null distribution. Our approach, for which we provide a software tool, outperforms existing prevalence estimation methods when effect size is uncertain and is sensitive to differences in prevalence or effect size across groups or conditions.

Communications PsychologyVol. 3(1)
University of Chicago (US)
National Science Foundation
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Mental Health Research Topics
4.24
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Bayesian p-curve mixture models as a tool to dissociate effect size and effect prevalence — Howard C. Nusbaum, John P. Veillette · Communications Psychology (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS