Very excited to share our new preprint! 📢 We investigated how often researchers misinterpret statistically nonsignificant results as the absence of an effect. Spoiler: it’s a lot (~81% of 599 articles)! Dive into our findings and their implications here:

@AminSinichi @ste_lee_murphy @LindaEReimann @aurelio_fdez Thanks a lot! :)

⏳ Reminder: Sign-up for the PYMS Pre-Symposium on Dec 5th closes tomorrow! Don't miss out on this chance to connect with fellow early career researchers. 🗓️ Check out the preliminary program here: Sign up while you still can! 👇

@BenCTurnbull @ste_lee_murphy @LindaEReimann @aurelio_fdez Personally, I am fine with terms like "statistically significant" IF we improve researchers statistical literacy AND educate them on approaches like equivalence testing that require them to also say what effects they would regard as practically relevant!

@lukaswallrich @F_Bethke @ste_lee_murphy @LindaEReimann @aurelio_fdez I don't think confidence intervals alone would suffice. The statement still strongly implies that the groups *are the same*, even with CIs. To truly convince me, I'd need a prespecified smallest effect size of interest and a corresponding Equivalence Test.

@F_Bethke @ste_lee_murphy @LindaEReimann @aurelio_fdez @trumanfrancis To strengthen the argument that there's no practically relevant effect of the intervention, you might consider Equivalence Testing with a predefined smallest effect size of interest (see @trumanfrancis response) (2/2)

@JakubTomek13 Nice! Excited to read about it! We were also left wondering how some of these really obvious misinterpretations made it through peer review and the editorial process… It’s surprising how often they "slip through"...

@JakubTomek13 100% my experience! We actually considered including examples of these 'misinterpretation chains' - where one misinterpretation gets cited, then cited again, and so on. Didn’t make it into the final paper, but I think it’s definitely a real issue!

@lakens Thanks for your kind words, Daniel! :)

@ianhussey Congratulations! 🎉

👋Early career meta-scientists, looking to connect with others in the field? Join the Platform for Young Meta-Scientists @NLrepro Pre-Symposium on Dec 5th! A great chance to meet fellow researchers, share ideas, and build your network!🤝 Sign up here: 📈

Exciting couple of days! Last week I received a teaching award for my statistics classes and yesterday one (of three) for the best talk at the German Conference for Student Research (#StuFo2024). Life‘s good lately! :)

RT @LuisDietz1: Vielen Dank an das Team der #StuFo2024 und der @UniHohenheim für die tolle Veranstaltung und dafür, dass ich hier zum erste…

RT @lakens: Group sequential analysis is a technique to collect data in batches, analyze the data after each batch, and decide to continue…

RT @lakens: Super excited about this Winter School - some of the best meta-scientists, methodologists, and generally some of my favorite pe…

RT @mariahhoye: Can you imagine if scientists or funders appreciated sleuths like this? Or if we saw potential examples of misconduct as…

RT @dom_roche: 📢📢Up to 200K over 3 years for meta-research projects in the Canadian context.📢📢 So nice to see this happening in Canada!🥳🥳 #…

RT @DuddaLeonie: Interesting presentations at the Paul Meehl graduate school day today. Spoiler: misinterpretations are very common 😬 @Raph…