References
- Anderson, S. F., Kelley, K., and Maxwell, S. E. (2017), “Sample-Size Planning for More Accurate Statistical Power: A Method Adjusting Sample Effect Sizes for Publication Bias and Uncertainty,” Psychological Science, 28, 1547–1562. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617723724.
- Burnham, K. P., and Anderson, D. R. (2014), “P Values Are Only an Index to Evidence: 20th- vs. 21st-Century Statistical Science,” Ecology, 95, 627–630. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1890/13-1066.1.
- Cohen, A. C. (1959), “Simplified Estimators for the Normal Distribution When Samples Are Singly Censored or Truncated,” Technometrics, 1, 217. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00401706.1959.10489859.
- Gelman, A. (2013), “P Values and Statistical Practice,” Epidemiology, 24, 69–72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/EDE.0b013e31827886f7.
- Gelman, A. (2016), “The Problems With P-Values Are Not Just With P-Values,” The American Statistician (Online Discussion).
- Gelman, A., and Carlin, J. (2014), “Beyond Power Calculations: Assessing Type S (Sign) and Type M (Magnitude) Errors,” Perspectives on Psychological Science, 9, 641–651. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691614551642.
- Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2005), “Why Most Published Research Findings Are False,” PLoS Medicine, 2, e124. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124.
- Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2008), “Why Most Discovered True Associations Are Inflated,” Epidemiology, 19, 640–648.
- Johnson, V. E. (2013), “Revised Standards for Statistical Evidence,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 110, 19313–19317. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1313476110.
- Lin, L., and Chu, H. (2018), “Quantifying Publication Bias in Meta-Analysis: Quantifying Publication Bias,” Biometrics, 74, 785–794.
- Lu, J., Qiu, Y., and Deng, A. (2019), “A Note on Type S/M Errors in Hypothesis Testing,” British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 72, 1–17. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bmsp.12132.
- McShane, B. B., and Gal, D. (2017), “Statistical Significance and the Dichotomization of Evidence,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, 112, 885–895. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.2017.1289846.
- Nosek, B. A., Spies, J. R., and Motyl, M. (2012), “Scientific Utopia: II. Restructuring Incentives and Practices to Promote Truth Over Publishability,” Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 615–631. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691612459058.
- Open Science Collaboration (2015), “Estimating the Reproducibility of Psychological Science,” Science, 349, aac4716.
- Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., and Simonsohn, U. (2011), “False-Positive Psychology: Undisclosed Flexibility in Data Collection and Analysis Allows Presenting Anything as Significant,” Psychological Science, 22, 1359–1366. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611417632.
- Wasserstein, R. L., and Lazar, N. A. (2016), “The ASA’s Statement on p-Values: Context, Process, and Purpose,” The American Statistician, 70, 129–133. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00031305.2016.1154108.
- Wasserstein, R. L., Schirm, A. L., and Lazar, N. A. (2019), “Moving to a World Beyond ‘p < 0.05’,” The American Statistician, 73, 1–19.