Evaluating Research in Personality and Social Psychology: Considerations of Statistical Power and Concerns About False Findings
- 26 July 2021
- journal article
- research article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
- Vol. 48 (7), 1105-1117
- https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672211030811
Abstract
Traditionally, statistical power was viewed as relevant to research planning but not evaluation of completed research. However, following discussions of high false finding rates (FFRs) associated with low statistical power, the assumed level of statistical power has become a key criterion for research acceptability. Yet, the links between power and false findings are not as straightforward as described. Assumptions underlying FFR calculations do not reflect research realities in personality and social psychology. Even granting the assumptions, the FFR calculations identify important limitations to any general influences of statistical power. Limits for statistical power in inflating false findings can also be illustrated through the use of FFR calculations to (a) update beliefs about the null or alternative hypothesis and (b) assess the relative support for the null versus alternative hypothesis when evaluating a set of studies. Taken together, statistical power should be de-emphasized in comparison to current uses in research evaluation.This publication has 43 references indexed in Scilit:
- Improving the Dependability of Research in Personality and Social PsychologyPersonality and Social Psychology Review, 2013
- Power and Error: Increased Risk of False Positive Results in Underpowered StudiesThe Open Epidemiology Journal, 2010
- Integrative data analysis: The simultaneous analysis of multiple data sets.Psychological Methods, 2009
- Most Published Research Findings Are False—But a Little Replication Goes a Long WayPLoS Medicine, 2007
- Why Most Published Research Findings Are FalsePLoS Medicine, 2005
- Null hypothesis significance testing: A review of an old and continuing controversy.Psychological Methods, 2000
- Bayes FactorsJournal of the American Statistical Association, 1995
- The earth is round (p < .05).American Psychologist, 1994
- Brief Notes: Statistical Power Analysis and Research ResultsAmerican Educational Research Journal, 1973
- On the Power of Statistical Tests in the American Educational Research JournalAmerican Educational Research Journal, 1972