Is Statistical Significance Significant?

More than 850 scientists and statisticians told the authors of a Nature commentary that they are endorsing an idea to ban 'statistical significance.' Critics say that declaring a result to be statistically significant or not essentially forces complicated questions to be answered as true or false. 'The world is much more uncertain than that,' says Nicoole Lazar, a professor of statistics at the University of Georgia. An entire issue of the journal The American Statistician is devoted to this question, with 43 articles and a 17,500-word editorial that Lazar co-authored.

'In the early 20th century, the father of statistics, R.A. Fisher, developed a test of significance,' reports NPR. 'It involves a variable called the p-value, that he intended to be a guide for judging results. Over the years, scientists have warped that idea beyond all recognition, creating an arbitrary threshold for the p-value, typically 0.05, and they use that to declare whether a scientific result is significant or not. Slashdot reader apoc.famine writes: In a nutshell, what the statisticians are recommending is that we embrace uncertainty, quantify it, and discuss it, rather than set arbitrary measures for when studies are worth publishing. This way research which appears interesting but which doesn't hit that magical p == 0.05 can be published and discussed, and scientists won't feel pressured to p-hack.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.