When indices disagree: facing conceptual and practical challenges

preprint OA: closed CC-BY-SA-4.0
🔓 Open OA copy View at publisher

Abstract

Hypothesis testing requires meaningful ways to quantify relevant biological phenomena and account for alternative mechanisms that could explain the same pattern. Researchers combine experiments, statistics, and indices to account for these confounding mechanisms. Key concepts in ecology and evolution, like niche breadth or fitness, can be represented by several indices, which often provide uncorrelated estimates. Is this because the indices use different types of noisy data or because the targeted phenomenon is complex and multidimensional? We discuss implications of these scenarios and propose five steps to aid researchers in identifying and combining indices, experiments, and statistics. Supported by efforts to build databases of hypotheses and indices and document assumptions, these steps help provide a formal strategy to reduce self-confirmatory bias.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. The paper's references may be in our DB but unresolved to ``paper_id`` (resolution happens at ingest when the cited DOI matches a row we already have). Run the cross-source citation reconcile pass to retry.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-05-19T01:45:01.086888+00:00
unpaywall
last seen: 2026-05-24T02:00:01.246996+00:00
License: CC-BY-SA-4.0