PubMed · 1604067
A comment on replication, p-values and evidence.
Abstract
It is conventionally thought that a small p-value confers high credibility on the observed alternative hypothesis, and that a repetition of the same experiment will have a high probability of resulting again in statistical significance. It is shown that if the observed difference is the true one, the probability of repeating a statistically significant result, the 'replication probability', is substantially lower than expected. The reason for this is a mistake that generates other seeming paradoxes: the interpretation of the post-trial p-value in the same way as the pre-trial alpha error. The replication probability can be used as a frequentist counterpart of Bayesian and likelihood methods to show that p-values overstate the evidence against the null hypothesis.
Explore related subjects
Keep this discovery
Explore connections, maps & timelines
S N Goodman. 1992. A comment on replication, p-values and evidence.. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.4780110705
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.