This article discusses the distinction between reporting and interpreting statistics in psychological science, suggesting ongoing criticism stems from misinterpretation.
Throughout the history of psychological science, there has been a continuing debate about which statistics are used and how these statistics are reported. I distinguish between reporting statistics, and interpreting statistics. This is important, because a lot of the criticism on the statistics researchers use comes from how statistics are interpreted, not how they are reported.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Daniël Lakens (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: