The DOI matches its Crossref record; 36 of the 36 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
AERA Editorial Policies regarding Statistical Significance Testing: Three Suggested Reforms
Abstract
comments on Thompson (1996), it is ar-gued that describing results as "signifi-cant " rather than "statistically signifi-cant " is confusing to those persons most susceptible to misinterpreting this tele-graphic wording. Contrary to Robinson and Levin's view, it is noted that the util-ity of the characterization of results as being due to "nonchance " is limited by the nature of the null hypothesis assumed to be true. It is suggested that effect sizes are important to interpret, even though they too can be misinterpreted; recent empirical studies of publications indicate that effect sizes are still too rarely reported. Finally, the value of "external " replicability analy-ses is acknowledged, but it is argued that "internal " replicability analyses can also be useful, and certainly are superior to statistical significance tests regarding evaluating result replicability, because sta-tistical significance tests do not evaluate replicability.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results.
Rosenthal, R. (1979) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.86.3.638 · Cited by 9,068
Casella, G., & Berger, R. (2024) · Chapman & Hall/CRC eBooks · doi:10.1201/9781003456285 · Cited by 5,711
Cohen, J. (1994) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.49.12.997 · Cited by 4,003
Design and Analysis of Experiments in Psychology and Education.
Ehrenberg, A. S. C., & Lindquist, E. F. (1954) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A (General) · doi:10.2307/2342775 · Cited by 2,623
Meehl, P. E. (1978) · Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-006x.46.4.806 · Cited by 1,947
Things I have learned (so far).
Cohen, J. (1990) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.45.12.1304 · Cited by 1,781
An Inquiry concerning human understanding
Hume, D. (1955) · Cited by 1,775
Consequences of prejudice against the null hypothesis.
Greenwald, A. G. (1975) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0076157 · Cited by 1,022
The case against statistical significance testing
Carver, R. (1978) · Harvard Educational Review · doi:10.17763/haer.48.3.t490261645281841 · Cited by 931
The test of significance in psychological research.
Bakan, D. (1966) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0020412 · Cited by 911
Cited by
Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: Understanding concepts and applications.
Thompson, B. (2004) · doi:10.1037/10694-000 · Cited by 3,469
Self-citationStatistical methods in psychology journals: Guidelines and explanations.
Wilkinson, L., & Task Force on Statistical Inference (1999) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.54.8.594 · Cited by 2,791
Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis
Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2000) · Language Learning · doi:10.1111/0023-8333.00136 · Cited by 2,569
Practical significance: a concept whose time has come
Kirk, R. E. (1996) · Educational and Psychological Measurement · doi:10.1177/0013164496056005002 · Cited by 1,778
Null hypothesis significance testing: a review of an old and continuing controversy
Nickerson, R. S. (2000) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.5.2.241 · Cited by 1,090
Metadata
- Authors
- Thompson, B.
- Venue
- Educational Researcher
- Published
- 1996-03
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 26
- ISSN
- 0013-189X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2094675405
- Cited by
- 339
- References
- 36
- FWCI
- 37.31
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: AERA Editorial Policies regarding Statistical Significance Testing: Three Suggested Reforms. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/1176337
- The paper
- Thompson, B. (1996). AERA Editorial Policies regarding Statistical Significance Testing: Three Suggested Reforms. Educational Researcher. https://doi.org/10.2307/1176337
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
