Responds to Biskin's comments (this issue) on the significance test controversy. Highlights areas of agreement (importance of replication evidence, importance of effect sizes) and disagreement (influence of sample size, evaluation of populations vs. samples, significance of Carver's article). Includes further recommendations for reporting research…

The use of multiple comparisons in analysis of variance (ANOVA) is discussed. It is argued that experimentwise Type I error rate inflation can be serious and that its influences are often unnoticed in ANOVA applications. Both classical balanced omnibus and orthogonal planned contrast tests inflate experimentwise error to an identifiable maximum.…

Introduces the three subsequent articles from this special section, which extend the discussion of future prospects for progress in the reporting and interpreting of effect sizes by researchers. The authors of these pieces represent diverse views. (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.…

Too few researchers understand what statistical significance testing does and does not do, and consequently their results are misinterpreted. This Digest explains the concept of statistical significance testing and discusses the meaning of probabilities, the concept of statistical significance, arguments against significance testing,…

This paper evaluates the logic underlying various criticisms of statistical significance testing and makes specific recommendations for scientific and editorial practice that might better increase the knowledge base. Reliance on the traditional hypothesis testing model has led to a major bias against nonsignificant results and to misinterpretation…