Are most published research findings false? Trends in statistical power, publication selection bias, and the false discovery rate in psychology (1975-2017).


Journal

PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2023
Historique:
received: 27 01 2021
accepted: 27 09 2023
medline: 23 10 2023
pubmed: 17 10 2023
entrez: 17 10 2023
Statut: epublish

Résumé

The validity of scientific findings may be challenged by the replicability crisis (or cases of fraud), which may result not only in a loss of trust within society but may also lead to wrong or even harmful policy or medical decisions. The question is: how reliable are scientific results that are reported as statistically significant, and how does this reliability develop over time? Based on 35,515 papers in psychology published between 1975 and 2017 containing 487,996 test values, this article empirically examines the statistical power, publication bias, and p-hacking, as well as the false discovery rate. Assuming constant true effects, the statistical power was found to be lower than the suggested 80% except for large underlying true effects (d = 0.8) and increased only slightly over time. Also, publication bias and p-hacking were found to be substantial. The share of false discoveries among all significant results was estimated at 17.7%, assuming a proportion θ = 50% of all hypotheses being true and assuming that p-hacking is the only mechanism generating a higher proportion of just significant results compared to just nonsignificant results. As the analyses rely on multiple assumptions that cannot be tested, alternative scenarios were laid out, again resulting in the rather optimistic result that although research results may suffer from low statistical power and publication selection bias, most of the results reported as statistically significant may contain substantial results, rather than statistical artifacts.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37847689
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0292717
pii: PONE-D-21-02988
pmc: PMC10581498
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

e0292717

Informations de copyright

Copyright: © 2023 Andreas Schneck. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Références

PeerJ. 2016 Apr 11;4:e1935
pubmed: 27077017
PLoS Biol. 2015 Mar 13;13(3):e1002106
pubmed: 25768323
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2014 Apr;143(2):534-47
pubmed: 23855496
Behav Res Methods. 2016 Dec;48(4):1205-1226
pubmed: 26497820
PLoS One. 2012;7(4):e35219
pubmed: 22536359
Nature. 2014 Feb 13;506(7487):150-2
pubmed: 24522584
Percept Mot Skills. 2011 Apr;112(2):331-48
pubmed: 21667745
PLoS One. 2014 Aug 25;9(8):e105937
pubmed: 25153333
Biostatistics. 2014 Jan;15(1):28-36; discussion 39-45
pubmed: 24068251
Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1993 Dec 31;703:135-46; discussion 146-8
pubmed: 8192291
Nat Rev Neurosci. 2013 May;14(5):365-76
pubmed: 23571845
R Soc Open Sci. 2016 Sep 21;3(9):160384
pubmed: 27703703
PLoS Med. 2005 Aug;2(8):e124
pubmed: 16060722
J Abnorm Soc Psychol. 1962 Sep;65:145-53
pubmed: 13880271
R Soc Open Sci. 2018 Sep 12;5(9):181190
pubmed: 30839704
Res Synth Methods. 2014 Mar;5(1):60-78
pubmed: 26054026
PLoS One. 2015 Jun 10;10(6):e0127872
pubmed: 26061881
JAMA. 1996 Dec 18;276(23):1877; author reply 1877
pubmed: 8968010
Psychol Sci. 2011 Nov;22(11):1359-66
pubmed: 22006061
R Soc Open Sci. 2014 Nov 19;1(3):140216
pubmed: 26064558
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2013;66(12):2303-9
pubmed: 24205936
R Soc Open Sci. 2017 Feb 1;4(2):160254
pubmed: 28386409
Acad Emerg Med. 2021 Dec;28(12):1379-1388
pubmed: 34133813
Biostatistics. 2014 Jan;15(1):1-12
pubmed: 24068246
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2012;65(11):2271-9
pubmed: 22853650
PLoS Biol. 2017 Mar 2;15(3):e2000797
pubmed: 28253258
Psychol Methods. 2020 Aug;25(4):456-471
pubmed: 31789538
PLoS Med. 2007 Oct 16;4(10):e297
pubmed: 17941715
Psychol Bull. 1992 Jul;112(1):155-9
pubmed: 19565683

Auteurs

Andreas Schneck (A)

Department of Sociology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany.

Articles similaires

Humans Middle Aged Female Male Surveys and Questionnaires
Adolescent Child Female Humans Male
Humans Scoliosis Mobile Applications Retrospective Studies Artificial Intelligence

Classifications MeSH