Analysis of type I and II error rates of Bayesian and frequentist parametric and nonparametric two-sample hypothesis tests under preliminary assessment of normality

Testing for differences between two groups is among the most frequently carried out statistical methods in empirical research. The traditional frequentist approach is to make use of null hypothesis significance tests which usepvalues to reject a null hypothesis. Recently, a lot of research has emerged which proposes Bayesian versions of the most common parametric and nonparametric frequentist two-sample tests. These proposals include Student's two-sample t-test and its nonparametric counterpart, the Mann-Whitney U test. In this paper, the underlying assumptions, models and their implications for practical research of recently proposed Bayesian two-sample tests are explored and contrasted with the frequentist solutions. An extensive simulation study is provided, the results of which demonstrate that the proposed Bayesian tests achieve better type I error control at slightly increased type II error rates. These results are important, because balancing the type I and II errors is a crucial goal in a variety of research, and shifting towards the Bayesian two-sample tests while simultaneously increasing the sample size yields smaller type I error rates. What is more, the results highlight that the differences in type II error rates between frequentist and Bayesian two-sample tests depend on the magnitude of the underlying effect.

Automated summary

The study examined the assumptions, models, and practical implications of recently proposed Bayesian two-sample tests, contrasting them with traditional frequentist solutions. Simulation results demonstrated that the proposed Bayesian tests achieved better type I error control while slightly increasing type II error rates. Moreover, differences in type II error rates between frequentist and Bayesian two-sample tests were found to depend on the magnitude of the underlying effect.