Interpretation of significance levels by psychological researchers: The .05 cliff effect may be overstated

Psychonomic Bulletin and Review

Volumn 8, Issue 4, 2001, Pages 847-850

  Poitevineau, Jacques ^a   Lecoutre, Bruno ^b  

^a CNRS   (France)

^b UNIVERSITÉ DE ROUEN   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DECISION MAKING; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; PSYCHOLOGY; RANDOMIZATION; THEORETICAL MODEL;

DECISION MAKING; HUMANS; MODELS, THEORETICAL; PSYCHOLOGY; RANDOM ALLOCATION;

EID: 0035751897     PISSN: 10699384     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03196227     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. BEAUCHAMP, K. L., & MAY, R. B. (1964). Replication report: Interpretation of levels of significance by psychological researchers. Psychological Reports, 14, 272.
2. CARVER, R. P. (1978). The case against statistical significance testing. Harvard Educational Review, 48, 378-399.
3. CASELLA, G., & BERGER, L. (1987). Reconciling Bayesian and frequentist evidence in the one-sided testing problem (with discussion). Journal of the American Statistical Association, 82, 106-111.
4. FALK, R., & GREENBAUM, C. W. (1995). Significance tests die hard: The amazing persistence of a probabilistic misconception. Theory & Psychology, 5, 75-98.
5. GIGERENZER, G. (1991). How to make cognitive illusions disappear: Beyond "Heuristics and biases." In N. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European Review of Social Psychology 2 (pp. 83-115). New York: Wiley.
6. LECOUTRE, M.-P. (1983). La démarche du chercheur en psychologie dans des situations d'analyse statistique de données expérimentales. Journal de Psychologie Normale et Pathologique, 3, 275-295.
7. LECOUTRE, M.-P. (2000). And . . . What about the researcher's point of view. In H. Rouanet, J.-M. Bernard, M.-C. Bert, B. Lecoutre, M.-P. Lecoutre, & B. Le Roux, New ways in statistical methodology: From significance tests to Bayesian inference (2nd ed., pp. 65-95). Bern: Peter Lang.
8. MINTURN, E. B., LANSKY, L. M., & DEMBER, W. N. (1972). The interpretation of levels of significance by psychologists: A replication and extension. Paper presented at the meeting of the Eastern Psychological Association, Boston.
9. NELSON, N., ROSENTHAL, R., & ROSNOW, R. L. (1986). Interpretation of significance levels and effect sizes by psychological researchers. American Psychologist, 41, 1299-1301.
10. NEYMAN, J., & PEARSON, E. S. (1933). On the problem of the most efficient tests of statistical hypotheses. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London: Series A, 231, 289-337.
11. OAKES, M. (1986). Statistical inference: A commentary for the social and behavioural sciences. New York: Wiley.
12. ROSENTHAL, R., & GAITO, J. (1963). The interpretation of levels of significance by psychological researchers. Journal of Psychology, 55, 33-38.
13. ROSENTHAL, R., & GAITO, J. (1964). Further evidence for the cliff effect in the interpretation of levels of significance. Psychological Reports, 15, 570.
14. ROUANET, H. (1998). Significance testing in a Bayesian framework: Assessing direction of effects. Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 21, 217-218.
15. ROYALL, R. M. (1986). The effect of sample size on the meaning of significance tests. American Statistician, 40, 313-315.
16. ROZEBOOM, W. W. (1960). The fallacy of the hypothetico-deductive significance test. Psychological Bulletin, 57, 416-428.
17. SCHMIDT, F. L. (1996). Statistical significance testing and cumulative knowledge in psychology: Implications for training of researchers. Psychological Methods, 1, 115-129.