IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jstats/v7y2024i4p87-1495d1542557.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bayesian Models Are More Sensitive than Frequentist Models in Identifying Differences in Small Datasets Comprising Phonetic Data

Author

Listed:
  • Georgios P. Georgiou

    (Department of Languages and Literature, University of Nicosia, Nicosia 2417, Cyprus
    Phonetic Lab, University of Nicosia, Nicosia 2417, Cyprus)

Abstract

While many studies have previously conducted direct comparisons between results obtained from frequentist and Bayesian models, our research introduces a novel perspective by examining these models in the context of a small dataset comprising phonetic data. Specifically, we employed mixed-effects models and Bayesian regression models to explore differences between monolingual and bilingual populations in the acoustic values of produced vowels. The former models are widely utilized in linguistic and phonetic research, whereas the latter offer promising approaches for achieving greater precision in data analysis. Our findings revealed that Bayesian hypothesis testing identified more differences compared to the post hoc test. Specifically, the post hoc test identified differences solely in the F1 of the vowel /a/, whereas the evidence ratios provided strong evidence of differences across multiple vowels and all measured parameters, including F1, F2, F3, and duration. These results may call into question the findings of a large number of studies incorporating frequentist models. In conclusion, our study supports the assertion that different statistical frameworks can lead to divergent interpretations, especially in cases with small sample sizes and complex data structures like those commonly found in phonetics. This can open a discussion about the need for careful methodological considerations and the potential benefits of Bayesian approaches in such situations.

Suggested Citation

  • Georgios P. Georgiou, 2024. "Bayesian Models Are More Sensitive than Frequentist Models in Identifying Differences in Small Datasets Comprising Phonetic Data," Stats, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-13, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jstats:v:7:y:2024:i:4:p:87-1495:d:1542557
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2571-905X/7/4/87/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2571-905X/7/4/87/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jstats:v:7:y:2024:i:4:p:87-1495:d:1542557. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.