Interrogating p-values

Journal of Mathematical Psychology

Volumn 57, Issue 5, 2013, Pages 188-189

  Gelman, Andrew ^a  

^a Och Spine at New York Presbyterian Hospitals   (United States)

Author keywords

P values; Replicability; Statistics

Indexed keywords

EID: 84886719192     PISSN: 00222496     EISSN: 10960880     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmp.2013.03.005     Document Type: Note

References (10)

1. Borsboom D., Mellenbergh G.J. Why psychometrics is not pathological: a comment on Mitchell. Theory and Psychology 2004, 14:105-120.
2. Francis G. Replication, statistical consistency, and publication bias (with discussion). Journal of Mathematical Psychology 2013, 57(5):153-169.
3. Gelman A. P-values and statistical practice. Epidemiology 2012.
4. Gelman A., Weakliem D. Of beauty, sex, and power: statistical challenges in estimating small effects. American Scientist 2009, 97:310-316.
5. Ioannidis J. Why most published research findings are false. PLOS Medicine 2005, 2(8):e124.
6. Krantz D.H. The null hypothesis testing controversy in psychology. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1999, 44:1372-1381.
7. Langmuir I. Pathological science. Transcribed and edited by R.N. Hall. Physics Today 1989, 42(10):36-48.
8. Mitchell J. Normal science, pathological science and psychometrics. Theory and Psychology 2000, 10:639-667.
9. Mitchell J. Is psychometrics pathological science?. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives 2008, 6:7-24.
10. Simmons J., Nelson L., Simonsohn U. False-positive psychology: undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allow presenting anything as significant. Psychological Science 2011, 22:1359-1366.