Department of Psychology, Psychological Methods, University of Amsterdam, Roetersstraat 15, 1018 WB, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Behav Res Methods. 2011 Sep;43(3):666-78. doi: 10.3758/s13428-011-0089-5.
In order to study the prevalence, nature (direction), and causes of reporting errors in psychology, we checked the consistency of reported test statistics, degrees of freedom, and p values in a random sample of high- and low-impact psychology journals. In a second study, we established the generality of reporting errors in a random sample of recent psychological articles. Our results, on the basis of 281 articles, indicate that around 18% of statistical results in the psychological literature are incorrectly reported. Inconsistencies were more common in low-impact journals than in high-impact journals. Moreover, around 15% of the articles contained at least one statistical conclusion that proved, upon recalculation, to be incorrect; that is, recalculation rendered the previously significant result insignificant, or vice versa. These errors were often in line with researchers' expectations. We classified the most common errors and contacted authors to shed light on the origins of the errors.
为了研究心理学报告错误的普遍性、性质（方向）和原因，我们检查了高影响力和低影响力心理学期刊的随机样本中报告的统计数据、自由度和 p 值的一致性。在第二项研究中，我们在最近的心理学文章的随机样本中确定了报告错误的普遍性。我们的结果基于 281 篇文章，表明心理学文献中约有 18%的统计结果被错误报告。在低影响力期刊中，不一致的情况比在高影响力期刊中更为常见。此外，大约 15%的文章包含至少一个统计结论，这些结论经重新计算后被证明是不正确的；也就是说，重新计算使先前显著的结果变得不显著，或者反之亦然。这些错误通常符合研究人员的预期。我们对最常见的错误进行了分类，并联系了作者，以了解错误的来源。
