The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Non‐significant results in ecology: a burden or a blessing in disguise?
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The probability of publication for a given study depends on the statistical significance, magnitude, or direction of the effect.
“We included peer‐reviewed and non‐peer‐reviewed studies since the probability of publication for a given study depends on the statistical significance, magnitude, or direction of the effect (Koricheva, 2003).”
From Acoustic indices as proxies for biodiversity: a meta‐analysis (2022) · cites this paper as Koricheva, 2003
Citations
Cites
Cohen, J. (1994) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.49.12.997 · Cited by 4,003
Publication bias in clinical research
Easterbrook, P. J., Gopalan, R., Berlin, J. A., & Matthews, D. R. (1991) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/0140-6736(91)90201-y · Cited by 3,109 · cited 1×
“In medicine, for instance, Easterbrook et al. (1991) demonstrated that studies with significant results were more likely to be published in journals with a high impact factor; such journals also tend to have higher rejection rates as compared to lower quality journals.”
Publication bias: evidence of delayed publication in a cohort study of clinical research projects
Stern, J. M., & Simes, R. J. (1997) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.315.7109.640 · Cited by 818
Ioannidis, J. P. A. (1998) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.279.4.281 · Cited by 632
Publication and related biases.
Song, Eastwood, Gilbody, Duley, & Sutton (2000) · Health Technology Assessment · doi:10.3310/hta4100 · Cited by 427
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 22
- 10.1038/385402a0 · DOI
- 10.2307/3546025 · DOI
- 10.2307/3546355 · DOI
- 10.2307/3546906 · DOI
- 10.1086/303337 · DOI
- 10.1086/393743 · DOI
- 10.1098/rspb.2001.1832 · DOI
- 10.1093/jee/79.5.1156 · DOI
- 10.1034/j.1600-0706.2002.960316.x · DOI · Paper page
- 10.2307/3547010 · DOI
- 10.1001/jama.280.3.250 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0169-5347(01)02235-2 · DOI
- 10.1890/0012-9658(2002)083[1162:JQESAP]2.0.CO;2 · DOI · Paper page
- Nykänen H., Damage‐induced changes in woody plants and their effects on insect herbivore performance: a meta‐analysis, Oikos, 0
- 10.1641/0006-3568(2001)051[1051:SSTEAR]2.0.CO;2 · DOI
- 10.1098/rspb.2000.1072 · DOI
- 10.1037/0033-2909.86.3.638 · DOI · Paper page
- Rotton J., 1995, Publication practices and the file drawer problem – a survey of published authors, J. Soc. Behav. Pers., 10, 1
- 10.1098/rspb.1999.0677 · DOI
- 10.1086/303233 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1365-2311.1994.tb00415.x · DOI
- 10.2307/20167258 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Acoustic indices as proxies for biodiversity: a meta‐analysis
Alcocer, I., Lima, H., Sugai, L. S. M., & Llusia, D. (2022) · Biological Reviews · doi:10.1111/brv.12890 · Cited by 273
“We included peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed studies since the probability of publication for a given study depends on the statistical significance, magnitude, or direction of the effect (Koricheva, 2003).”
MethodMeta-analysis in applied ecology
Stewart, G. (2010) · Biology Letters · doi:10.1098/rsbl.2009.0546 · Cited by 214
Leimu, R., & Koricheva, J. (2004) · Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.2004.2828 · Cited by 156
Analyzing cause and effect in environmental assessments: using weighted evidence from the literature
Norris, R. H., Webb, J. A., Nichols, S. J., Stewardson, M. J., & Harrison, E. T. (2012) · Freshwater Science · doi:10.1899/11-027.1 · Cited by 113
How to critically read ecological meta-analyses
Lortie, C. J., Stewart, G., Rothstein, H., & Lau, J. (2015) · Research Synthesis Methods · doi:10.1002/jrsm.1109 · Cited by 39
Metadata
- Authors
- Koricheva, J.
- Affiliations
- University of Turku (FI)
- Corresponding author
- Julia Koricheva
- ORCID
- Julia Koricheva
- Venue
- Oikos
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2003-07-04
- Volume
- 102
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 397-401
- ISSN
- 0030-1299 (ISSN-L)
- 1600-0706
- OpenAlex
- W3145925453
- Cited by
- 75
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 6 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 3.17
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Oikos (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › Academic Publishing and Open Access
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
- Keywords
- non-significant results, statistical significance, null hypothesis significance testing, ecological research, statistical power
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
