In this article I give a critical evaluation of the use and limitations of null-model-based hypothesis testing as a research strategy in the biological sciences. According to this strategy, the null model based on a randomization procedure provides an appropriate null hypothesis stating that the existence of a pattern is the result of random processes or can be expected by chance alone, and proponents of other hypotheses should first try to reject this null hypothesis in order to demonstrate their own hypotheses. Using as an example the controversy over the use of null hypotheses and null models in species co-occurrence studies, I argue that null-model-based hypothesis testing fails to work as a proper analog to traditional statistical null-hypothesis testing as used in well-controlled experimental research, and that the random process hypothesis should not be privileged as a null hypothesis. Instead, the possible use of the null model resides in its role of providing a way to challenge scientists’ commonsense judgments about how a seemingly unusual pattern could have come to be. Despite this possible use, null-model-based hypothesis testing still carries certain limitations, and it should not be regarded as an obligation for biologists who are interested in explaining patterns in nature to first conduct such a test before pursuing their own hypotheses.

中文翻译：

---

基于零模型的假设检验的使用和局限性

在本文中，我对作为生物科学研究策略的基于零模型的假设检验的使用和局限性进行了批判性评估。根据这种策略，基于随机化程序的零模型提供了适当的零假设，说明模式的存在是随机过程的结果或可以单独预期，其他假设的支持者应首先尝试拒绝这一点零假设以证明他们自己的假设。作为一个例子，在物种共现研究中使用零假设和零模型的争议，我认为基于零模型的假设检验不能作为传统统计零假设检验的适当模拟，正如在井中使用的那样-对照实验研究，并且随机过程假设不应被视为零假设。相反，零模型的可能用途在于它提供一种方法来挑战科学家关于看似不寻常的模式是如何形成的常识判断。尽管有这种可能的用途，但基于零模型的假设检验仍然具有一定的局限性，对于对解释自然界模式感兴趣的生物学家，不应将其视为在追求自己的假设之前首先进行此类检验的义务。