Publication Bias Against Null Results
AbstractStudies suggest a bias against the publication of null (p > .05) results. Instead of significance, we advocate reporting effect sizes and confidence intervals, and using replication studies. If statistical tests are used, power tests should accompany them.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by EconWPA in its series General Economics and Teaching with number 0502034.
Length: 2 pages
Date of creation: 11 Feb 2005
Date of revision:
Note: Type of Document - pdf; pages: 2
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://184.108.40.206
publication; bias; null results;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- A - General Economics and Teaching
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2005-04-16 (All new papers)
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Raymond Hubbard & JS Armstrong, 2005. "Replications and Extensions in Marketing – Rarely Published But Quite Contrary," General Economics and Teaching 0502051, EconWPA.
- Hubbard, Raymond & Vetter, Daniel E., 1996. "An empirical comparison of published replication research in accounting, economics, finance, management, and marketing," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 153-164, February.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (EconWPA).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.