Why “Encouraging” Effect Size Reporting Is Not Working: The Etiology of Researcher Resistance to Changing Practices

Unknown author

44 citations0/0 files storedThe Journal of Psychology

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Meta-analysis and systematic reviews Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference Psychology Research and Bibliometrics

Abstract

Given decades of lucid, blunt admonitions that statistical significance tests are often misused and that the tests are somewhat limited in their usefulness, what is needed is less repeated bashing of statistical tests and some honest reflection regarding the etiology of researchers' denial and psychological resistance (sometimes unconscious) to an improved practice. Three etiologies are briefly explored here: (a) atavism, (b) “is/ought” logic fallacies, and (c) confusion or desperation. Understanding the etiology of psychological resistance may ultimately lead to improved interventions to assist in overcoming researcher resistance to reporting effect sizes and using non-nil nulls and other analytic improvements.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 44 citations exist upstream.

References

1994The earth is round (p < .05).2021The educational researcher 1996Chronicle of Higher Education 1996Practical Significance: A Concept Whose Time Has Come 1978The Case Against Statistical Significance Testing 1996Statistical significance testing and cumulative knowledge in psychology: Implications for training of researchers.1989Statistical procedures and the justification of knowledge in psychological science.1996Statistical significance testing and cumulative knowledge in psychology: Implications for training of researchers.

Cited by

2013Why the resistance to statistical innovations? Bridging the communication gap.2000Statistical Significance with Comments by Editors of Marketing Journals 2001The Efficacy of Two Improvement-Over-Chance Effect Sizes for Two-Group Univariate Comparisons Under Variance Heterogeneity and Nonnormality 2007A Call for Statistical Reform in EAQ 2016Failure to Report Effect Sizes 2013

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.