4.6 Article

Controlling the false discovery rate in behavior genetics research

Journal

BEHAVIOURAL BRAIN RESEARCH
Volume 125, Issue 1-2, Pages 279-284

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/S0166-4328(01)00297-2

Keywords

multiple comparisons; exploratory behavior in mice; Bonferroni procedure; FDR

Funding

  1. NINDS NIH HHS [1R01 NS 40234-01] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The screening of many endpoints when comparing groups from different strains, searching for some statistically significant difference, raises the multiple comparisons problem in its most severe form. Using the 0.05 level to decide which of the many endpoints' differences are statistically significant, the probability of finding a difference to be significant even though it is not real increases far beyond 0.05. The traditional approach to this problem has been to control the probability of making even one such error-the Bonferroni procedure being the most familiar procedure achieving such control. However, the incurred loss of power stemming from such control led many practitioners to neglect multiplicity control altogether. The False Discovery Rate (FDR), suggested by Benjamini and Hochberg [J Royal Stat Soc Ser B 57 (1995) 289], is a new. different, and compromising point of view regarding the error in multiple comparisons. The FDR is the expected proportion of false discoveries among the discoveries, and controlling the FDR goes a long way towards controlling the increased error from multiplicity while losing less in the ability to discover real differences. In this paper we demonstrate the problem in two studies: the study of exploratory behavior [Behav Brain Res (2001)], and the study of the interaction of strain differences with laboratory environment [Science 284 (1999) 1670]. We explain the FDR criterion, and present two simple procedures that control the FDR. We demonstrate their increased power when used in the above two studies. (C) 2001 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available