The practices suggested by Thompson (1999) have not been adopted by researchers because they would rarely be useful. There are problems with reports of effect size that depend on methodological details. The practical importance of a finding depends on personal circumstances, and the researcher’s personal evaluation of that importance is outside the purview of science. Researchers are concerned with the accuracy of their conclusion, and given pcalculated, estimates of replicability add no information to this issue.
American Psychological Association . (1994). Publication manual of the AmericanPsychological Association. Washington, DC: Author.
2.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
3.
Draine, S.C. , & Greenwald, A.G. (1998). Replicable unconscious semantic priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 127, 286–303.
4.
Frick, R.W. (1996). The appropriate use of null hypothesis testing. Psychological Methods, 1, 379–390.
5.
Levin, J.R. (1998). To test or not to test H0Educational and Psychological Measurement, 58, 313–333.
6.
Thompson, B. (1994). Guidelines for authors. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54, 837–847.
7.
Thompson, B. (1999). If statistical significance tests are broken/misused, what practices should supplement or replace them?Theory & Psychology, 9, 165–181.
