| Title |
The (mis)reporting of statistical results in psychology journals
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Behavior Research Methods, April 2011
|
| DOI | 10.3758/s13428-011-0089-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marjan Bakker, Jelte M. Wicherts |
| Abstract |
In order to study the prevalence, nature (direction), and causes of reporting errors in psychology, we checked the consistency of reported test statistics, degrees of freedom, and p values in a random sample of high- and low-impact psychology journals. In a second study, we established the generality of reporting errors in a random sample of recent psychological articles. Our results, on the basis of 281 articles, indicate that around 18% of statistical results in the psychological literature are incorrectly reported. Inconsistencies were more common in low-impact journals than in high-impact journals. Moreover, around 15% of the articles contained at least one statistical conclusion that proved, upon recalculation, to be incorrect; that is, recalculation rendered the previously significant result insignificant, or vice versa. These errors were often in line with researchers' expectations. We classified the most common errors and contacted authors to shed light on the origins of the errors. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 98 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 14 | 14% |
| United Kingdom | 6 | 6% |
| Japan | 5 | 5% |
| Spain | 4 | 4% |
| Canada | 3 | 3% |
| Sweden | 2 | 2% |
| New Zealand | 2 | 2% |
| Germany | 2 | 2% |
| Norway | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 13 | 13% |
| Unknown | 45 | 46% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 78 | 80% |
| Scientists | 13 | 13% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 3% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 3% |
| Unknown | 1 | 1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 650 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 19 | 3% |
| Germany | 7 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 7 | 1% |
| Netherlands | 6 | <1% |
| Italy | 4 | <1% |
| Portugal | 3 | <1% |
| Canada | 3 | <1% |
| Australia | 3 | <1% |
| China | 2 | <1% |
| Other | 17 | 3% |
| Unknown | 579 | 89% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 174 | 27% |
| Researcher | 77 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 74 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 67 | 10% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 44 | 7% |
| Other | 125 | 19% |
| Unknown | 89 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 344 | 53% |
| Social Sciences | 37 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 26 | 4% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 21 | 3% |
| Other | 81 | 12% |
| Unknown | 120 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 156. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 February 2023.
All research outputs
#265,248
of 25,646,963 outputs
Outputs from Behavior Research Methods
#12
of 2,562 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#847
of 120,292 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Behavior Research Methods
#1
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,646,963 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,562 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 120,292 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.