manipulating the alpha level cannot cure significance testing

Clicks: 155
ID: 146105
2018
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #1,057 of 1,131 articles by views in accounts of chemical research

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 1,131 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
We argue that making accept/reject decisions on scientific hypotheses, including a recent call for changing the canonical alpha level from p = 0.05 to p = 0.005, is deleterious for the finding of new discoveries and the progress of science. Given that blanket and variable alpha levels both are problematic, it is sensible to dispense with significance testing altogether. There are alternatives that address study design and sample size much more directly than significance testing does; but none of the statistical tools should be taken as the new magic method giving clear-cut mechanical answers. Inference should not be based on single studies at all, but on cumulative evidence from multiple independent studies. When evaluating the strength of the evidence, we should consider, for example, auxiliary assumptions, the strength of the experimental design, and implications for applications. To boil all this down to a binary decision based on a p-value threshold of 0.05, 0.01, 0.005, or anything else, is not acceptable.
Reference Key
trafimow2018frontiersmanipulating Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors ;David Trafimow;Valentin Amrhein;Valentin Amrhein;Corson N. Areshenkoff;Carlos J. Barrera-Causil;Eric J. Beh;Yusuf K. Bilgiç;Roser Bono;Roser Bono;Michael T. Bradley;William M. Briggs;Héctor A. Cepeda-Freyre;Sergio E. Chaigneau;Daniel R. Ciocca;Juan C. Correa;Denis Cousineau;Michiel R. de Boer;Subhra S. Dhar;Igor Dolgov;Juana Gómez-Benito;Juana Gómez-Benito;Marian Grendar;Marian Grendar;James W. Grice;Martin E. Guerrero-Gimenez;Andrés Gutiérrez;Tania B. Huedo-Medina;Klaus Jaffe;Armina Janyan;Armina Janyan;Ali Karimnezhad;Fränzi Korner-Nievergelt;Fränzi Korner-Nievergelt;Koji Kosugi;Martin Lachmair;Rubén D. Ledesma;Rubén D. Ledesma;Roberto Limongi;Roberto Limongi;Marco T. Liuzza;Rosaria Lombardo;Michael J. Marks;Gunther Meinlschmidt;Gunther Meinlschmidt;Gunther Meinlschmidt;Ladislas Nalborczyk;Ladislas Nalborczyk;Hung T. Nguyen;Raydonal Ospina;Jose D. Perezgonzalez;Roland Pfister;Juan J. Rahona;David A. Rodríguez-Medina;Xavier Romão;Susana Ruiz-Fernández;Susana Ruiz-Fernández;Susana Ruiz-Fernández;Isabel Suarez;Marion Tegethoff;Mauricio Tejo;Rens van de Schoot;Rens van de Schoot;Ivan I. Vankov;Santiago Velasco-Forero;Tonghui Wang;Yuki Yamada;Felipe C. M. Zoppino;Fernando Marmolejo-Ramos
Journal accounts of chemical research
Year 2018
DOI
10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00699
URL
http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00699/full
Keywords
p-value

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.