The psychological reality of the learned "p < .05" boundary.

IF 3.4 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Cognitive Research-Principles and Implications Pub Date : 2024-05-03 DOI:10.1186/s41235-024-00553-x
V N Vimal Rao, Jeffrey K Bye, Sashank Varma
{"title":"The psychological reality of the learned \"p < .05\" boundary.","authors":"V N Vimal Rao, Jeffrey K Bye, Sashank Varma","doi":"10.1186/s41235-024-00553-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The .05 boundary within Null Hypothesis Statistical Testing (NHST) \"has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move\" (to quote Douglas Adams). Here, we move past meta-scientific arguments and ask an empirical question: What is the psychological standing of the .05 boundary for statistical significance? We find that graduate students in the psychological sciences show a boundary effect when relating p-values across .05. We propose this psychological boundary is learned through statistical training in NHST and reading a scientific literature replete with \"statistical significance\". Consistent with this proposal, undergraduates do not show the same sensitivity to the .05 boundary. Additionally, the size of a graduate student's boundary effect is not associated with their explicit endorsement of questionable research practices. These findings suggest that training creates distortions in initial processing of p-values, but these might be dampened through scientific processes operating over longer timescales.</p>","PeriodicalId":46827,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Research-Principles and Implications","volume":"9 1","pages":"27"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11068716/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive Research-Principles and Implications","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-024-00553-x","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The .05 boundary within Null Hypothesis Statistical Testing (NHST) "has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move" (to quote Douglas Adams). Here, we move past meta-scientific arguments and ask an empirical question: What is the psychological standing of the .05 boundary for statistical significance? We find that graduate students in the psychological sciences show a boundary effect when relating p-values across .05. We propose this psychological boundary is learned through statistical training in NHST and reading a scientific literature replete with "statistical significance". Consistent with this proposal, undergraduates do not show the same sensitivity to the .05 boundary. Additionally, the size of a graduate student's boundary effect is not associated with their explicit endorsement of questionable research practices. These findings suggest that training creates distortions in initial processing of p-values, but these might be dampened through scientific processes operating over longer timescales.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
学会 "p < .05 "界限的心理现实。
零假设统计检验(NHST)中 0.05 的界限 "让很多人非常生气,并被广泛认为是一个错误的举动"(引用道格拉斯-亚当斯的话)。在此,我们将跳出元科学的争论,提出一个经验性的问题:0.05 的统计显著性界限在心理学上的地位如何?我们发现,心理科学专业的研究生在将 p 值与 .05 相联系时,会表现出边界效应。我们认为,这种心理边界是通过 NHST 的统计培训和阅读充斥着 "统计显著性 "的科学文献学习到的。与这一提议相一致的是,本科生对 .05 临界值并不表现出同样的敏感性。此外,研究生边界效应的大小与他们对有问题的研究实践的明确认可无关。这些研究结果表明,培训会造成对 p 值的初始处理失真,但这些失真可能会通过在较长时期内运作的科学过程得到抑制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
7.30%
发文量
96
审稿时长
25 weeks
期刊最新文献
Delay discounting predicts COVID-19 vaccine booster willingness. Emotions in misinformation studies: distinguishing affective state from emotional response and misinformation recognition from acceptance. Acquiring complex concepts through classification versus observation. The roles of cognitive dissonance and normative reasoning in attributions of minds to robots. Older adults' recognition of medical terminology in hospital noise.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1