645
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    48
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      False-positive psychology: undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant.

      Psychological Science
      Adult, Computer Simulation, Data Collection, standards, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Humans, Peer Review, Research, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Publications, Research Design, Research Personnel, psychology, Statistics as Topic, Young Adult

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          In this article, we accomplish two things. First, we show that despite empirical psychologists' nominal endorsement of a low rate of false-positive findings (≤ .05), flexibility in data collection, analysis, and reporting dramatically increases actual false-positive rates. In many cases, a researcher is more likely to falsely find evidence that an effect exists than to correctly find evidence that it does not. We present computer simulations and a pair of actual experiments that demonstrate how unacceptably easy it is to accumulate (and report) statistically significant evidence for a false hypothesis. Second, we suggest a simple, low-cost, and straightforwardly effective disclosure-based solution to this problem. The solution involves six concrete requirements for authors and four guidelines for reviewers, all of which impose a minimal burden on the publication process.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Comments

          Comment on this article