Skip to main content
Kent Academic Repository

Is banning significance testing the best way to improve applied social science research? – Questions on Gorard (2016)

Spreckelsen, Thees, Van der Horst, Mariska (2016) Is banning significance testing the best way to improve applied social science research? – Questions on Gorard (2016). Sociological Research Online, 21 (3). pp. 95-105. ISSN 1360-7804. (doi:10.5153/sro.4076) (KAR id:57300)

PDF (Is banning significance testing the best way to improve applied social science research? – Questions on Gorard (2016)) Author's Accepted Manuscript
Language: English
Download this file
(PDF/604kB)
[thumbnail of Is banning significance testing the best way to improve applied social science research? – Questions on Gorard (2016)]
Request a format suitable for use with assistive technology e.g. a screenreader
PDF
Language: English

Restricted to Repository staff only
[thumbnail of Response_to_Gorard2016_final.pdf]
Official URL:
http://dx.doi.org/10.5153/sro.4076

Abstract

Significance testing is widely used in social science research. It has long been criticised on statistical grounds and problems in the research practice. This paper is an applied researchers’ response to Gorard’s (2016) 'Damaging real lives through obstinacy: re-emphasising why significance testing is wrong' in Sociological Research Online 21(1). He participates in this debate concluding from the issues raised that the use and teaching of significance testing should cease immediately. In that, he goes beyond a mere ban of significance testing, but claims that researchers still doing this are being unethical. We argue that his attack on applied scientists is unlikely to improve social science research and we believe he does not sufficiently prove his claims. In particular we are concerned that with a narrow focus on statistical significance, Gorard misses alternative, if not more important, explanations for the often-lamented problems in social science research. Instead, we argue that it is important to take into account the full research process, not just the step of data analysis, to get a better idea of the best evidence regarding a hypothesis.

Item Type: Article
DOI/Identification number: 10.5153/sro.4076
Additional information: Library - please can you check the copyright of this as I am unsure.
Uncontrolled keywords: Statistical significance, Transparency, Replication, Ban, Hypothesis testing, Controversy.
Subjects: H Social Sciences > HM Sociology
Divisions: Divisions > Division for the Study of Law, Society and Social Justice > School of Social Policy, Sociology and Social Research
Depositing User: Lucie Patch
Date Deposited: 15 Sep 2016 10:41 UTC
Last Modified: 17 Aug 2022 12:21 UTC
Resource URI: https://kar.kent.ac.uk/id/eprint/57300 (The current URI for this page, for reference purposes)

University of Kent Author Information

Spreckelsen, Thees.

Creator's ORCID:
CReDIT Contributor Roles:

Van der Horst, Mariska.

Creator's ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5988-7318
CReDIT Contributor Roles:
  • Depositors only (login required):

Total unique views for this document in KAR since July 2020. For more details click on the image.