Redefine statistical significance

Daniel J. Benjamin; James O. Berger; Magnus Johannesson; Brian A. Nosek; Eric‐Jan Wagenmakers; Richard A. Berk; Kenneth A. Bollen; Björn Brembs; Lawrence Brown; Colin F. Camerer; David Cesarini; Chris Chambers; Merlise A. Clyde; Thomas D. Cook; Paul De Boeck; Zoltán Dienes; Anna Dreber; Kenny Easwaran; Charles Efferson; Ernst Fehr; Fiona Fidler; Andy P. Field; Marc R. Forster; Edward I. George; Richard Gonzalez; Steven N. Goodman; Edwin Green; Donald P. Green; Anthony G. Greenwald; Jarrod D. Hadfield; Larry V. Hedges; Leonhard Held; Teck‐Hua Ho; Herbert Hoijtink; Daniel J. Hruschka; Kosuke Imai; Guido W. Imbens; John P A Ioannidis; Minjeong Jeon; James H. Jones; Michael Kirchler; David Laibson; John A. List; Roderick J. A. Little; Arthur Lupia; Édouard Machery; Scott E. Maxwell; Michael A. McCarthy; Don A. Moore; Stephen L. Morgan; Marcus R. Munafò; Shinichi Nakagawa; Brendan Nyhan; Timothy Parker; Luis R. Pericchi; Marco Perugini; Jeff Rouder; Judith Rousseau; Victoria Savalei; Felix D. Schönbrodt; Thomas Sellke; Betsy Sinclair; Dustin Tingley; Trisha Van Zandt; Simine Vazire; Duncan J. Watts; Christopher Winship; Robert L. Wolpert; Yu Xie; Cristobal Young; Jonathan Zinman; Valen E. Johnson

doi:10.1038/s41562-017-0189-z

RDLNetworkEcosystem

About FAQ

Redefine statistical significance — Daniel J. Benjamin (2017) | RDL Network

Related publications

Preprint2017

Redefine statistical significance

Daniel J. Benjamin, James O. Berger, Magnus Johannesson, Brian A. Nosek, Eric‐Jan Wagenmakers, Richard A. Berk, Kenneth A. Bollen, Björn Brembs, Lawrence Brown, Colin F. Camerer, David Cesarini, Chris Chambers, Merlise Aycock Clyde, Tom Cook, Paul De Boeck, Zoltán Dienes, Anna Dreber, Kenny Easwaran, Charles Efferson, Ernst Fehr, Fiona Fidler, Andy P. Field, Malcolm E. Forster, Ed George, Richard Gonzalez, Steve Goodman, Ed Green, Don Green, Anthony G. Greenwald, Jarrod D. Hadfield, Larry V. Hedges, Leonhard Held, Teck‐Hua Ho, Herbert Hoijtink, James H. Jones, Daniel J. Hruschka, Kosuke Imai, Guido W. Imbens, John P A Ioannidis, Minjeong Jeon, Michael Kirchler, David Laibson, John A. List, Roderick J. A. Little, Arthur Lupia, Édouard Machery, Scott E. Maxwell, Michael McCarthy, Don A. Moore, Stephen L. Morgan, Marcus R. Munafò, Shinichi Nakagawa, Brendan Nyhan, Timothy Parker, Luis R. Pericchi, Marco Perugini, Jeffrey N. Rouder, Judith Rousseau, Victoria Savalei, Felix D. Schönbrodt, Thomas Sellke, Betsy Sinclair, Dustin Tingley, Trisha Van Zandt, Simine Vazire, Duncan J. Watts, Christopher Winship, Robert L. Wolpert, Yu Xie, CRISTOBAL YOUNG, Jonathan Zinman, Valen E. Johnson

Preprint2017

Redefine statistical significance

Daniel J. Benjamin, James M. Berger, Magnus Johannesson, Brian A. Nosek, Eric‐Jan Wagenmakers, Richard A. Berk, Kenneth A. Bollen, Björn Brembs, Lawrence Brown, Colin F. Camerer, David Cesarini, Chris Chambers, Merlise Aycock Clyde, Tom Cook, Paul De Boeck, Zoltán Dienes, Anna Dreber, Kenny Easwaran, Charles Efferson, Ernst Fehr, Fiona Fidler, Andy P. Field, Malcolm E. Forster, Ed George, Richard Gonzalez, Steve Goodman, ,

Article2019

Redefine statistical significance

Abstract

Discussion(0)

Related publications

Redefine statistical significance

Redefine statistical significance

Most recommended medical interventions reach P &lt; 0.005 for their primary outcomes in meta-analyses

Effect of Formal Statistical Significance on the Credibility of Observational Associations

Statistical significance and publication reporting bias in abstracts of reproductive medicine studies

Redefine statistical significance

Abstract

Discussion(0)

Related publications

Redefine statistical significance

Redefine statistical significance

Most recommended medical interventions reach P &amp;lt; 0.005 for their primary outcomes in meta-analyses

Effect of Formal Statistical Significance on the Credibility of Observational Associations

Statistical significance and publication reporting bias in abstracts of reproductive medicine studies

Most recommended medical interventions reach P < 0.005 for their primary outcomes in meta-analyses