Definition
False Discovery Rate (FDR) is a statistical procedure employed to correct for multiple comparisons. Development was initially motivated in part as an alternative to the use of conservative familywise error rate (FWER) corrections that failed to identify marked effects in high-dimensional datasets that contained few cases (see Benjamini and Hochberg 1995). The False Discovery Rate is defined as the expected proportion of errors committed by falsely rejecting the null hypothesis (Benjamini and Hochberg 1995; Lin and Lee 2015). While originally implemented in behavioral genetics research (Benjamini et al. 2001; Goeman and Solari 2014), it has recently been introduced to the neuroimaging literature as an alternative to popular...
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
References and Readings
Benjamini, Y., & Gavrilov, Y. (2009). A simple forward selection procedure based on false discovery rate control. Ann. Appl. Stat., 3(1), 179–198. https://doi.org/10.1214/08-AOAS194.
Benjamini, Y., & Hochberg, Y. (1995). Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological), 57(1), 289–300.
Benjamini, Y., Drai, D., Elmer, G., Kafkafi, N., & Golani, I. (2001). Controlling the false discovery rate in behavior genetics research. Behavioural Brain Research, 125(1–2), 279–284.
Genovese, C. R., Lazar, N. A., & Nichols, T. (2002). Thresholding of statistical maps in functional neuroimaging using the false discovery rate. NeuroImage, 15(4), 870–878. https://doi.org/10.1006/nimg.2001.1037.
Glickman, M. E., Rao, S. R., & Schultz, M. R. (2014). False discovery rate control is a recommended alternative to Bonferroni-type adjustments in health studies. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 67(8), 850–857. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.03.012.
Goeman, J. J., & Solari, A. (2014). Multiple hypothesis testing in genomics. Statistics in Medicine, 33(11), 1946–1978. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.6082.
Li, D., Xie, Z., Zand, M., Fogg, T., & Dye, T. (2017). Bon-EV: An improved multiple testing procedure for controlling false discovery rates. BMC Bioinformatics, 18(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12859-016-1414-x.
Lin, Y. T., & Lee, W. C. (2015). Importance of presenting the variability of the false discovery rate control. BMC Genetics, 16, 97. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12863-015-0259-z.
Madar, V., & Batista, S. (2016). FastLSU: A more practical approach for the Benjamini-Hochberg FDR controlling procedure for huge-scale testing problems. Bioinformatics, 32(11), 1716–1723. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btw029.
Tak, S., & Ye, J. C. (2014). Statistical analysis of fNIRS data: A comprehensive review. NeuroImage, 85(Pt 1), 72–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.06.016.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this entry
Cite this entry
Cobia, D. (2017). False Discovery Rate. In: Kreutzer, J., DeLuca, J., Caplan, B. (eds) Encyclopedia of Clinical Neuropsychology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56782-2_9057-2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56782-2_9057-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-56782-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-56782-2
eBook Packages: Springer Reference Behavioral Science and PsychologyReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences