IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/qualqt/v47y2013i1p257-270.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is there life after P>0.05? Statistical significance and quantitative sociology

Author

Listed:
  • Athena Engman

Abstract

The overwhelming majority of quantitative work in sociology reports levels of statistical significance. Often, significance is reported with little or no discussion of what it actually entails philosophically, and this can be problematic when analyses are interpreted. Often, significance is understood to represent the probability of the null hypothesis (usually understood as a lack of relationship between two or more variables). This understanding is simply erroneous. The first section of this paper deals with this common misunderstanding. The second section gives a history of significance testing in the social sciences, with reference to the historical foundations of many common misinterpretations of significance testing. The third section is devoted to a discussion of the consequences of misinterpreting statistical significance for sociology. It is argued that reporting statistical significance provides sociology with very little value, and that the consequences of misinterpreting significance values outweighs the benefits of their use. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2013

Suggested Citation

  • Athena Engman, 2013. "Is there life after P>0.05? Statistical significance and quantitative sociology," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 257-270, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:qualqt:v:47:y:2013:i:1:p:257-270
    DOI: 10.1007/s11135-011-9516-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11135-011-9516-z
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11135-011-9516-z?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gigerenzer, Gerd, 2004. "Mindless statistics," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 587-606, November.
    2. Jane Miller & Yana van der Meulen Rodgers, 2008. "Economic importance and statistical significance: Guidelines for communicating empirical research," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(2), pages 117-149.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. David Bartram, 2021. "Is happiness u-shaped in age everywhere? A methodological reconsideration for Europe," Papers 2108.13671, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2022.
    2. David Bartram & Leonardo Salvatore Alaimo & Eileen Avery & Anthony Bardo & Enrico Di Bella & Martin Binder & Ferdi Botha & Sandra Fachelli & Andrea Gatto & Jintao Lu & Adam Okulicz-Kozaryn & Angeles S, 2024. "Towards the Next Fifty Years of Social Indicators Research: Some Guidance for Authors," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 174(1), pages 1-17, August.
    3. Stephen Gorard, 2016. "Damaging Real Lives through Obstinacy: Re-Emphasising Why Significance Testing is Wrong," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 21(1), pages 102-115, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Flyvbjerg, Bent & Ansar, Atif & Budzier, Alexander & Buhl, Søren & Cantarelli, Chantal & Garbuio, Massimo & Glenting, Carsten & Holm, Mette Skamris & Lovallo, Dan & Molin, Eric & Rønnest, Arne & Stewa, 2019. "On de-bunking “Fake News” in the post-truth era: How to reduce statistical error in research," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 409-411.
    2. Stanley, T.D. & Doucouliagos, Chris & Jarrell, Stephen B., 2008. "Meta-regression analysis as the socio-economics of economics research," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 276-292, February.
    3. Thomas Mayer, 2012. "Ziliak and McCloskey's Criticisms of Significance Tests: An Assessment," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 9(3), pages 256-297, September.
    4. Kim, Jae H., 2017. "Stock returns and investors' mood: Good day sunshine or spurious correlation?," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 94-103.
    5. Alice Wieland & James Sundali & Markus Kemmelmeier & Rakesh Sarin, 2014. "Gender differences in the endowment effect: Women pay less, but won't accept less," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 9(6), pages 558-571, November.
    6. Robert Bloomfield & Kristina Rennekamp & Blake Steenhoven, 2018. "No System Is Perfect: Understanding How Registration‐Based Editorial Processes Affect Reproducibility and Investment in Research Quality," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(2), pages 313-362, May.
    7. Nicolas Vallois & Dorian Jullien, 2017. "Estimating Rationality in Economics: A History of Statistical Methods in Experimental Economics," Working Papers halshs-01651070, HAL.
    8. Choudhury, Sanchari, 2023. "Non-random selection into entrepreneurship in the realm of government decentralization and corruption," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    9. Voxi Heinrich Amavilah & Antonio Rodríguez Andrés, 2024. "Knowledge Economy and the Economic Performance of African Countries: A Seemingly Unrelated and Recursive Approach," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 15(1), pages 110-143, March.
    10. Holst, Elke & Schäfer, Andrea & Schrooten, Mechthild, 2011. "Remittances and Gender: Theoretical Considerations and Empirical Evidence," IZA Discussion Papers 5472, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    11. Kevin Hoover & Mark Siegler, 2008. "Sound and fury: McCloskey and significance testing in economics," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(1), pages 1-37.
    12. Kodila-Tedika, Oasis & Rindermann, Heiner & Christainsen, Gregory, 2014. "Cognitive capital, governance, and the wealth of nations," MPRA Paper 57563, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Lei Zheng & Xuemeng Guo & Libin Zhao, 2021. "How Does Transportation Infrastructure Improve Corporate Social Responsibility? Evidence from High-Speed Railway Openings in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-23, June.
    14. Marc Orlitzky, 2011. "Institutionalized dualism: statistical significance testing as myth and ceremony," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 47-77, September.
    15. Rigdon, Edward E., 2016. "Choosing PLS path modeling as analytical method in European management research: A realist perspective," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 598-605.
    16. Marko Hofmann & Silja Meyer-Nieberg, 2018. "Time to dispense with the p-value in OR?," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 26(1), pages 193-214, March.
    17. Rindermann, Heiner & Becker, David, 2018. "FLynn-effect and economic growth: Do national increases in intelligence lead to increases in GDP?," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 87-93.
    18. Simplice A. Asongu & Voxi H. S. Amavilah & Antonio R. Andres, 2019. "Business Dynamics, Knowledge Economy, and the Economic Performance of African Countries," Research Africa Network Working Papers 19/004, Research Africa Network (RAN).
    19. repec:cup:judgdm:v:9:y:2014:i:6:p:558-571 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Kim, Jae, 2015. "How to Choose the Level of Significance: A Pedagogical Note," MPRA Paper 66373, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    21. Alexander Libman & Joachim Zweynert, 2014. "Ceremonial Science: The State of Russian Economics Seen Through the Lens of the Work of ‘Doctor of Science’ Candidates," Working Papers 337, Leibniz Institut für Ost- und Südosteuropaforschung (Institute for East and Southeast European Studies).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:qualqt:v:47:y:2013:i:1:p:257-270. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.