How feasible is it to abandon statistical significance? A reflection based on a short survey
Background: There is a growing trend in using the “statistically significant” term in the scientific literature. However, harsh criticism of this concept motivated the recommendation to withdraw its use of scientific publications. We aimed to validate the support and the feasibility of adherence to this recommendation, among researchers having declared in favor of removing the statistical significance.
Methods: We surveyed signatories of an article published that defended this recommendation, to validate their opinion and ask them about how likely they will retire the concept of statistical significance.
Results: We obtained 151 responses which confirmed the support for the mentioned publication in aspects such as the adequate interpretation of the p-value, the degree of agreement, and the motivations to sign it. However, there was a wide distribution of answers about how likely are they to use the concept of "statistical significance” in future publications. About 42% declared being neutral, or that would likely use it again. We described arguments referred by several signatories and discussed aspects to be considered in the interpretation of research results.
Conclusions: The responses obtained from a proportion of signatories validated their declared position against the use of statistical significance. However, even in this group, the full application of this recommendation does not seem feasible. The arguments related to the inappropriate use of statistical tests should promote more education among researchers and users of scientific evidence.
Figure 1
Figure 2
This is a list of supplementary files associated with this preprint. Click to download.
Posted 15 May, 2020
Received 22 May, 2020
Invitations sent on 29 Apr, 2020
On 29 Apr, 2020
On 27 Apr, 2020
On 26 Apr, 2020
On 05 Sep, 2019
On 03 Mar, 2020
Received 18 Feb, 2020
On 11 Feb, 2020
Received 20 Dec, 2019
On 17 Dec, 2019
Invitations sent on 23 Oct, 2019
On 05 Sep, 2019
On 14 Aug, 2019
On 13 Aug, 2019
On 13 Aug, 2019
How feasible is it to abandon statistical significance? A reflection based on a short survey
Posted 15 May, 2020
Received 22 May, 2020
Invitations sent on 29 Apr, 2020
On 29 Apr, 2020
On 27 Apr, 2020
On 26 Apr, 2020
On 05 Sep, 2019
On 03 Mar, 2020
Received 18 Feb, 2020
On 11 Feb, 2020
Received 20 Dec, 2019
On 17 Dec, 2019
Invitations sent on 23 Oct, 2019
On 05 Sep, 2019
On 14 Aug, 2019
On 13 Aug, 2019
On 13 Aug, 2019
Background: There is a growing trend in using the “statistically significant” term in the scientific literature. However, harsh criticism of this concept motivated the recommendation to withdraw its use of scientific publications. We aimed to validate the support and the feasibility of adherence to this recommendation, among researchers having declared in favor of removing the statistical significance.
Methods: We surveyed signatories of an article published that defended this recommendation, to validate their opinion and ask them about how likely they will retire the concept of statistical significance.
Results: We obtained 151 responses which confirmed the support for the mentioned publication in aspects such as the adequate interpretation of the p-value, the degree of agreement, and the motivations to sign it. However, there was a wide distribution of answers about how likely are they to use the concept of "statistical significance” in future publications. About 42% declared being neutral, or that would likely use it again. We described arguments referred by several signatories and discussed aspects to be considered in the interpretation of research results.
Conclusions: The responses obtained from a proportion of signatories validated their declared position against the use of statistical significance. However, even in this group, the full application of this recommendation does not seem feasible. The arguments related to the inappropriate use of statistical tests should promote more education among researchers and users of scientific evidence.
Figure 1
Figure 2