From fact to fake: The importance of being significant

References

• Amrhein V, Greenland S, McShane B. 2019. Scientists rise up against statistical significance. Nature. 567:305–307.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arbuthnot J. 1710. An argument for divine providence, taken from the constant regularity observed in the births of both sexes. Philos Trans Royal Soc London. 27:186–190.
   Google Scholar
• Bakan D. 1966. The test of significance in psychological research. Psychol Bull. 66(6):423–437.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bem DJ. 2011. Feeling the future: Experimental evidence for anomalous retroactive influences on cognition and affect. J Pers Soc Psychol. 100(3):407–425.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berkson J. 1938. Some difficulties of interpretation encountered in the application of the chi-square test. J Amer Stat Assoc. 33(203):526–536.
   Google Scholar
• Boring EG. 1916. The number of observations upon which a limen may be based. Amer J Psychol. 27(3):315–319.
   Google Scholar
• Boring EG. 1919. Mathematical vs. scientific significance. Psychol Bull. 16(10):335–338.
   Google Scholar
• Christopher J. 2021. The raw truth about paper mills. FEBS Lett. 595(13):1751–1757.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen J. 1990. Things I have learned (so far). Amer Psychol. 45:1304–1312.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen J. 1994. The earth is round (p < .05). Amer Psychol. 49:997–1003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Else H, VanNoorden R. 2021. The battle against paper mills. Nature. 591:516–519.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Engber D. 2017. Daryl Bem proved ESP is real: which means science is broken. Slate https://slate.com/health-and-science/2017/06/daryl-bem-proved-esp-is-real-showed-science-is-broken.html. June 07, 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Falk R, Greenbaum CW. 1995. Significance tests die hard: the amazing persistence of a probabilistic misconception. Theory Psychol. 5(1):75–98.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fisher RA. 1925. Statistical methods for research workers. Edinburgh, London: Oliver & Boyd.
   Google Scholar
• Gigerenzer G. 2004. Mindless statistics. J Socio-Econ. 33:587–606.
   Google Scholar
• Good IJ. 1975. Explicativity, corroboration, and the relative odds of hypotheses. Synthese 30:39–73.
   Google Scholar
• Hassler U, Hosseinkouchack M. 2022. Understanding nonsense correlation between (independent) random walks in finite samples. Stat Papers 63:181–195.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hassler U, Pohle MO. 2022. Unlucky number 13? Manipulating evidence subject to snooping. Int Stat Rev. 90:397–410.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hirschauer N, Grüner S, Mußhoff O, Becker C. 2019. Twenty steps towards an adequate inferential interpretation of p-values in econometrics. J Econ Stat. 239(4):703–721.
   Google Scholar
• Hollenbeck JR, Wright PM. 2017. Harking, sharking, and tharking: Making the case for post hoc analysis of scientific data. J Manage. 43(1):5–18.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ioannidis JPA. 2005. Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Med. 2(8):e124.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• John LK, Loewenstein G, Prelec D. 2012. Measuring the prevalence of questionable research practices with incentives for truth telling. Psychol Sci. 23(5):524–532.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kerr NL. 1998. HARKing: hypothesizing after the results are known. Personal Social Psychol Rev 2(3):196–217.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kourany J, Carrier M. 2020. Science and the production of ignorance–when the quest for knowledge is thwarted. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Leamer EE. 1978. Specification searches: ad hoc inference with nonexperimental data. New York: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Meehl PE. 1978. Theoretical risks and tabular asterisks: Sir Karl, Sir Ronald, and the slow progress of soft psychology. J Consult Clin Psychol 46(4):806–834.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Orzack SH, Stubblefield JW, Akmaev VR, Colls P, Munné S, Scholl T, Steinsaltz D, Zuckerman JE (2015). The human sex ratio from conception to birth. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 112:E2102–E2111.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pearson K. 1900. On the criterion that a given system of deviations from the probable in the case of a correlated system of variables is such that it can be reasonably supposed to have arisen from random sampling. Philos Mag (Ser 5). 50(302):157–175.
   Google Scholar
• Proctor RN. 1995. Cancer wars: how politics shapes what we know and don’t know about cancer. New York: BasicBooks.
   Google Scholar
• Proctor RN. 2008. Agnotoloty: A missing term to describe the cultural production of ignorance (and its study). In: Proctor RN, Schiebinger L, editors. Agnotoloty–the making and unmaking of ignorance. Redwood City, CA: Stanford University Press. p. 1–33.
   Google Scholar
• Rozeboom WW. 1960. The fallacy of the null-hypothesis significance test. Psychol Bull. 57:416–428.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shoesmith E. 1987. The continental controversy over Arbuthnot’s argument for divine providence. Hist Math. 14(2):133–146.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simmons JP, Nelson LD, Simonsohn U. 2011. False-positive psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant. Psychol Sci. 22(11):1359–1366.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simonsohn U. 2014. Posterior-hacking: Selective reporting invalidates Bayesian results also. Available at SSRN 2374040.
   Google Scholar
• Simonsohn U, Nelson LD, Simmons JP. 2014. p-curve: A key to the file-drawer. J Exp Psychol Gen. 143(2):534–547.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sterling TD. 1959. Publication decisions and their possible effects on inferences drawn from tests of significance - or vice versa. J Amer Stat Assoc. 54(285):30–34.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sterling TD, Rosenbaum WL, Weinkam JJ. 1995. Publication decisions revisited: The effect of the outcome of statistical tests on the decision to publish and vice versa. Amer Stat. 49(1):108–112.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stigler SM. 1986. The history of statistics: the measurement of uncertainty before 1900. Cambridge, MA and London, England: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Utts J. 1999. The significance of statistics in mind-matter research. J Sci Explor. 13(4):615–638.
   Google Scholar
• Wagenmakers EJ, Wetzels R, Borsboom D, van der Maas HLJ. 2011. Why psychologists must change the way they analyze their data: the case of psi: Comment on Bem (2011). J Pers Soc Psychol. 100(3):426–432.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wasserstein RL, Lazar NA. 2016. The ASA’s statement on p-values: Context, process, and purpose. Amer Stat. 70(2):129–133.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wasserstein RL, Schirm AL, Lazar NA. 2019. Moving to a world beyond “p < 0.05”. Amer Stat. 73(sup1):1–19.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ziliak ST, McCloskey DN. 2008. The cult of statistical significance: how the standard error costs us jobs, justice, and lives. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
   Google Scholar