You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Marginally Significant Effects as Evidence for Hypotheses
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Psychological Science, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1177/0956797616645672 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Laura Pritschet, Derek Powell, Zachary Horne |
| Abstract |
Some effects are statistically significant. Other effects do not reach the threshold of statistical significance and are sometimes described as "marginally significant" or as "approaching significance." Although the concept of marginal significance is widely deployed in academic psychology, there has been very little systematic examination of psychologists' attitudes toward these effects. Here, we report an observational study in which we investigated psychologists' attitudes concerning marginal significance by examining their language in over 1,500 articles published in top-tier cognitive, developmental, and social psychology journals. We observed a large change over the course of four decades in psychologists' tendency to describe a p value as marginally significant, and overall rates of use appear to differ across subfields. We discuss possible explanations for these findings, as well as their implications for psychological research. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 135 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 | 20 | 15% |
| United Kingdom | 14 | 10% |
| Japan | 8 | 6% |
| Spain | 6 | 4% |
| Germany | 5 | 4% |
| Australia | 5 | 4% |
| Canada | 4 | 3% |
| Sweden | 2 | 1% |
| Netherlands | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 13 | 10% |
| Unknown | 56 | 41% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 75 | 56% |
| Scientists | 41 | 30% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 13 | 10% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 6 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 307 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 2 | <1% |
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Japan | 2 | <1% |
| Brazil | 2 | <1% |
| Canada | 2 | <1% |
| Austria | 1 | <1% |
| Czechia | 1 | <1% |
| Hungary | 1 | <1% |
| Chile | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 2 | <1% |
| Unknown | 291 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 75 | 24% |
| Student > Master | 44 | 14% |
| Researcher | 38 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 24 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 20 | 7% |
| Other | 61 | 20% |
| Unknown | 45 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 139 | 45% |
| Social Sciences | 24 | 8% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 19 | 6% |
| Linguistics | 9 | 3% |
| Computer Science | 8 | 3% |
| Other | 50 | 16% |
| Unknown | 58 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 78. 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 15 April 2020.
All research outputs
#567,177
of 25,928,676 outputs
Outputs from Psychological Science
#1,144
of 4,342 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,638
of 340,509 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Psychological Science
#113
of 951 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,928,676 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,342 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 86.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 340,509 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 951 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.