Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Comillas Pontifical University, Madrid, Spain.
Psicothema. 2013;25(3):408-14. doi: 10.7334/psicothema2012.207.
Recent reviews have drawn attention to frequent consistency errors when reporting statistical results.
We have reviewed the statistical results reported in 186 articles published in four Spanish psychology journals. Of these articles, 102 contained at least one of the statistics selected for our study: Fisher-F , Student-t and Pearson-c 2 .
Out of the 1,212 complete statistics reviewed, 12.2% presented a consistency error, meaning that the reported p-value did not correspond to the reported value of the statistic and its degrees of freedom. In 2.3% of the cases, the correct calculation would have led to a different conclusion than the reported one. In terms of articles, 48% included at least one consistency error, and 17.6% would have to change at least one conclusion. In meta-analytical terms, with a focus on effect size, consistency errors can be considered substantial in 9.5% of the cases.
These results imply a need to improve the quality and precision with which statistical results are reported in Spanish psychology journals.
最近的评论引起了人们对报告统计结果时频繁出现一致性错误的关注。
我们对发表在四家西班牙心理学杂志上的 186 篇文章中的统计结果进行了审查。这些文章中，有 102 篇包含了我们研究中选择的至少一种统计数据：Fisher-F、Student-t 和 Pearson-c 2。
在审查的 1,212 个完整统计数据中，有 12.2%存在一致性错误，这意味着报告的 p 值与报告的统计数据及其自由度不对应。在 2.3%的情况下，正确的计算会导致与报告的结论不同。就文章而言，48%的文章至少存在一个一致性错误，17.6%的文章至少要改变一个结论。在元分析中，重点是效应大小，9.5%的情况下可以认为一致性错误是实质性的。
这些结果表明，西班牙心理学杂志需要提高报告统计结果的质量和精度。
