Given some consensus that statistical significance tests are broken, misused, or at least have somewhat limited utility, the focus of discussion within the field ought to move beyond additional bashing of statistical significance tests, and toward more constructive suggestions for improved practice. Five suggestions for improved practice are…

This paper summarizes the literature regarding statistical significance testing with an emphasis on: (1) the post-1994 literature in various disciplines; (2) alternatives to statistical significance testing; and (3) literature exploring why researchers have demonstrably failed to be influenced by the 1994 American Psychological Association…

This paper summarizes the literature regarding statistical significant testing with an emphasis on recent literature in various discipline and literature exploring why researchers have demonstrably failed to be influenced by the American Psychological Association publication manual's encouragement to report effect sizes. Also considered are…

The level of standardized effect sizes obtained by chance and the use of significance tests to guard against spuriously high standardized effect sizes were studied. The concept of the "protected effect size" is also introduced. Monte Carlo methods were used to generate data for the study using random normal deviates as the basis for sample means…

Reviews practices regarding tests of statistical significance and policies of the American Educational Research Association (AERA). Decades of misuse of statistical significance testing are described, and revised editorial policies to improve practice are highlighted. Correct interpretation of statistical tests, interpretation of effect sizes, and…

Editorial practices revolving around tests of statistical significance are explored. The logic of statistical significance testing is presented in an accessible manner--many people who use statistical tests might not place such a premium on them if they knew what the tests really do, and what they do not do. The etiology of decades of misuse of…

The controversy about the use or misuse of statistical significance testing has become the major methodological issue in educational research. This special issue contains three articles that explore the controversy, three commentaries on these articles, an overall response, and three rejoinders by the first three authors. They are: (1)…

Argues that describing results as "significant" rather than "statistically significant" is confusing to the very people most apt to misinterpret this telegraphic wording. The importance of reporting the effect size and the value of both internal and external replicability analyses are stressed. (SLD)

It is argued that point estimates of effect sizes and confidence intervals around these point estimates are more appropriate statistics for individual studies than reliance on statistical significance testing and that meta-analysis is appropriate for analysis of data from multiple studies. (SLD)

Reviews null hypothesis statistical significance testing (NHST) in its historical context and concludes that workable alternatives to NHST are available. Among suggested alternatives, effect magnitude measures, replication techniques, and meta-analytic techniques are discussed. (SLD)

Attempts to clarify the positions of T. Nix and J. Barnette on statistical significance testing, advocates the routine use of effect size, and encourages reporting results in simple terms. (SLD)

Discusses commonalities in the papers of this special issue, addresses concerns about errors of omission expressed by T. Knapp, and provides some recommendations for the use of statistical significance testing with requirements for estimates of effect sizes. (SLD)

Misuses of null hypothesis significance testing are reviewed and alternative approaches are suggested for carrying out and reporting statistical tests that might be useful to program evaluators. Several themes, including the importance of respecting the magnitude of Type II errors and describing effect sizes in units stakeholders can understand,…

Considers reviews of L. Daniels's article on editorial policy regarding statistical significance testing and concludes that the controversy is not over, although the gradual movement toward requiring additional information in the reporting of statistical results is viewed as a positive trend. (SLD)

Comments on discussions of statistical significance testing in this special issue, placing the articles in the context of contemporary research literature. Empirical evidence is cited that suggests that the American Psychological Association's policy of encouraging effect size reporting has had no appreciable effect on the research literature.…