Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Conservation Biologyarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
Conservation Biology
Article . 2006 . Peer-reviewed
License: Wiley Online Library User Agreement
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.

You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.

impact of criticism of null hypothesis significance testing on statistical reporting practices in conservation biology

Authors: Fiona Fidler; Geoff Cumming; Mark A. Burgman; Robert Buttrose; Neil Thomason;

impact of criticism of null hypothesis significance testing on statistical reporting practices in conservation biology

Abstract

Abstract:  Over the last decade, criticisms of null‐hypothesis significance testing have grown dramatically, and several alternative practices, such as confidence intervals, information theoretic, and Bayesian methods, have been advocated. Have these calls for change had an impact on the statistical reporting practices in conservation biology? In 2000 and 2001, 92% of sampled articles in Conservation Biology and Biological Conservation reported results of null‐hypothesis tests. In 2005 this figure dropped to 78%. There were corresponding increases in the use of confidence intervals, information theoretic, and Bayesian techniques. Of those articles reporting null‐hypothesis testing—which still easily constitute the majority—very few report statistical power (8%) and many misinterpret statistical nonsignificance as evidence for no effect (63%). Overall, results of our survey show some improvements in statistical practice, but further efforts are clearly required to move the discipline toward improved practices.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Publishing, Conservation of Natural Resources, Ecology, Research Design, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Decision Making

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    citations
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    111
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
  • citations
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    111
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    Powered byBIP!BIP!
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
citations
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
111
Top 10%
Top 10%
Top 10%
bronze