Lack of group-to-individual generalizability is a threat to human subjects research

Only for ergodic processes will inferences based on group-level data generalize to individual experience or behavior. Because human social and psychological processes typically have an individually variable and time-varying nature, they are unlikely to be ergodic. In this paper, six studies with a r...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences - PNAS Vol. 115; no. 27; pp. E6106 - E6115
Main Authors Fisher, Aaron J., Medaglia, John D., Jeronimus, Bertus F.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published United States National Academy of Sciences 03.07.2018
SeriesPNAS Plus
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Only for ergodic processes will inferences based on group-level data generalize to individual experience or behavior. Because human social and psychological processes typically have an individually variable and time-varying nature, they are unlikely to be ergodic. In this paper, six studies with a repeated-measure design were used for symmetric comparisons of interindividual and intraindividual variation. Our results delineate the potential scope and impact of nonergodic data in human subjects research. Analyses across six samples (with 87–94 participants and an equal number of assessments per participant) showed some degree of agreement in central tendency estimates (mean) between groups and individuals across constructs and data collection paradigms. However, the variance around the expected value was two to four times larger within individuals than within groups. This suggests that literatures in social and medical sciences may overestimate the accuracy of aggregated statistical estimates. This observation could have serious consequences for how we understand the consistency between group and individual correlations, and the generalizability of conclusions between domains. Researchers should explicitly test for equivalence of processes at the individual and group level across the social and medical sciences.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
content type line 23
ObjectType-Undefined-3
Edited by David L. Donoho, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, and approved May 25, 2018 (received for review July 4, 2017)
Author contributions: A.J.F. designed research; A.J.F. performed research; A.J.F. analyzed data; and A.J.F., J.D.M., and B.F.J. wrote the paper.
ISSN:0027-8424
1091-6490
1091-6490
DOI:10.1073/pnas.1711978115