Revised evidence for statistical standards.

Abstract

In (1), Johnson proposes replacing the usual p = 0.05 standard for significance with the more stringent p = 0.005. This might be good advice in practice but we remain troubled by Johnson’s logic because it seems to dodge the essential nature of any such rule, that it expresses a tradeoff between the risks of publishing misleading results and of important… (More)
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1322995111

Topics

  • Presentations referencing similar topics