Aug
21
Yet more on p values ...
I wasn't going to post on this ... but couldn't resist. A recent QJEP paper reports suspicious patterns in p values across three psychology journals.
This has been blogged elsewhere (see here and here), so I haven't got too much to add. Although I generally like the paper and am glad it got published in a decent journal (I'm an EPS member and subscriber so I'm glad they published it), I can't say I find the main finding surprising. Everything we know about how significance testing is used in practice would predict the basic pattern of a bump just below p = .05.
This has been blogged elsewhere (see here and here), so I haven't got too much to add. Although I generally like the paper and am glad it got published in a decent journal (I'm an EPS member and subscriber so I'm glad they published it), I can't say I find the main finding surprising. Everything we know about how significance testing is used in practice would predict the basic pattern of a bump just below p = .05.
