Inappropriate Fiddling with Statistical Analyses to Obtain a Desirable P-value: Tests to Detect its Presence in Published Literature
“Much has been written regarding p-values below certain thresholds (most notably 0.05) denoting statistical significance and the tendency of such p-values to be more readily publishable in peer-reviewed journals. Intuition suggests that there may be a tendency to manipulate statistical analyses to push a “near significant p-value” to a level that is considered significant. This article presents a method for detecting the presence of such manipulation (herein called “fiddling”) in a distribution of p-values from independent studies. Simulations are used to illustrate the properties of the method. The results suggest that the method has low type I error and that power approaches acceptable levels as the number of p-values being studied approaches 1000.”
Photo: Wikimedia commons
Discoblog: NCBI ROFL: Amusing titles in scientific journals and article citation.
Discoblog: NCBI ROFL: Consequences of erudite vernacular utilized irrespective of necessity: problems with using long words needlessly.
Discoblog: NCBI ROFL: A new scientific source of bias: SILLY bias. Analysis of citations of BMJ’s Christmas articles.
NCBI ROFL. Real articles. Funny subjects.
Read our FAQ!