Inferential Statistics as Descriptive Statistics: There Is No Replication Crisis if We Don’t Expect Replication

Valentin Amrhein, David Trafimow and Sander Greenland

The American Statistician, 2019, vol. 73, issue S1, 262-270

Abstract: Statistical inference often fails to replicate. One reason is that many results may be selected for drawing inference because some threshold of a statistic like the P-value was crossed, leading to biased reported effect sizes. Nonetheless, considerable non-replication is to be expected even without selective reporting, and generalizations from single studies are rarely if ever warranted. Honestly reported results must vary from replication to replication because of varying assumption violations and random variation; excessive agreement itself would suggest deeper problems, such as failure to publish results in conflict with group expectations or desires. A general perception of a “replication crisis” may thus reflect failure to recognize that statistical tests not only test hypotheses, but countless assumptions and the entire environment in which research takes place. Because of all the uncertain and unknown assumptions that underpin statistical inferences, we should treat inferential statistics as highly unstable local descriptions of relations between assumptions and data, rather than as providing generalizable inferences about hypotheses or models. And that means we should treat statistical results as being much more incomplete and uncertain than is currently the norm. Acknowledging this uncertainty could help reduce the allure of selective reporting: Since a small P-value could be large in a replication study, and a large P-value could be small, there is simply no need to selectively report studies based on statistical results. Rather than focusing our study reports on uncertain conclusions, we should thus focus on describing accurately how the study was conducted, what problems occurred, what data were obtained, what analysis methods were used and why, and what output those methods produced.

Date: 2019
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (26)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00031305.2018.1543137 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:amstat:v:73:y:2019:i:s1:p:262-270

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/UTAS20

DOI: 10.1080/00031305.2018.1543137

Access Statistics for this article

The American Statistician is currently edited by Eric Sampson

More articles in The American Statistician from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().