The “Big Five” Misinterpretations of Statistical Significance

#1
C C Offline
http://www.statspecialist.com/blog/the-b...nificance/

EXCERPT: There is ample evidence that many of us do not know the correct interpretation of outcomes of statistical tests, or p values. For example, at the end of a standard statistics course, most students know how to calculate statistical tests, but they do not typically understand what the results mean (Haller & Krauss, 2002). About 80% of psychology professors endorse at least one incorrect interpretation of statistical tests (Oakes, 1986). It is easy to find similar misinterpretations in books and articles (Cohen, 1994), so it seems that psychology students get their false beliefs from teachers and also from what students read. However, the situation is no better in other behavioral science disciplines (e.g., Hubbard & Armstrong, 2006).

Most misunderstandings about statistical tests involve overinterpretation, or the tendency to see too much meaning in statistical significance. Specifically, we tend to believe that statistical tests tell us what we want to know, but this is wishful thinking. Elsewhere I described statistical tests as a kind of collective Rorschach inkblot test for the behavioral sciences in that what we see in them has more to do with fantasy than with what is really there (Kline, 2004). Such wishful thinking is so pervasive that one could argue that much of our practice of hypothesis testing based on statistical tests is myth....

= = = = = = = =

Also: Statistical fallacy impairs post-publication mood

EXCERPT: [...] This mistake in analysis – which is far from unique to this paper – is discussed in a classic 2011 paper by Nieuwenhuis and colleagues: Erroneous analyses of interactions in neuroscience: a problem of significance. At the time of writing the sentiment on Pubpeer is that the paper should be retracted – in effect striking it from the scientific record. With commentary like this, you can see why Pubpeer has previously been the target of legal action by aggrieved researchers who feel the site unfairly maligns their work....
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Article Our obsession with statistical significance is ruining science C C 0 167 Dec 2, 2025 04:44 PM
Last Post: C C
  Trump officially declares antifa a terror menace? (statistical distrbution problems) C C 4 684 Sep 20, 2025 05:04 AM
Last Post: Magical Realist
  Research “Ban-the-Box” not helping job applicants with criminal records (statistical analysis) C C 0 492 Apr 16, 2025 10:36 PM
Last Post: C C
  Research Statistical experts warn of looming threats to vital official data C C 0 497 Jul 9, 2024 09:56 PM
Last Post: C C
  4+ hours smartphone use tied to health risks for adolescents (statistical analysis) C C 1 593 Dec 10, 2023 10:31 PM
Last Post: Magical Realist
  Research Something is wrong with psychological research (decades of statistical delusion) C C 1 594 Nov 1, 2023 05:19 PM
Last Post: ellisael
  Study finds genetic links between traits are often overstated (statistical analysis) C C 0 691 Nov 18, 2022 03:31 AM
Last Post: C C
  COVID as a hoax is ‘gateway’ to belief in conspiracy theories (statistical analysis) C C 1 811 Oct 27, 2022 03:18 AM
Last Post: Kornee
  Statistical technique hints at hundreds of lost medieval legends C C 0 393 Feb 21, 2022 11:42 PM
Last Post: C C
  Racism is a framework, not a theory (statistical modeling) C C 1 555 Jan 8, 2022 02:49 AM
Last Post: Syne



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)