Statistics Reform: Practitioner’s Perspective

preprint OA: closed CC-BY-4.0

Abstract

It is widely believed that one of the main causes of the replication crisis in scientific research is some of the most commonly used statistical methods, such as null hypothesis significance testing (NHST). This has prompted many scientists to call for statistics reform. As a practitioner in hydraulics and measurement science, the author extensively used statistical methods in environmental engineering and hydrological survey projects. The author strongly concurs with the need for statistics reform. This paper offers a practitioner’s perspective on statistics reform. In the author’s view, some statistical methods are good and should withstand statistics reform, while others are flawed and should be abandoned and removed from textbooks and software packages. This paper focuses on two methods derived from the _t_-distribution: the two-sample _t_-test and the _t_-interval method for calculating measurement uncertainty. We demonstrate why both methods should be abandoned. We recommend using advanced estimation statistics in place of the two-sample _t_-test and an unbiased estimation method in place of the _t_-interval method. Two examples are presented to illustrate the recommended approaches.
Full text 621 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · click to expand
There is a newer version available for this {{ publicationType }}. View latest version {{ publication.field_name }} {{ publication.subfield_name }} Copyright: © {{ publicationYear }} {{ publication.presentation_authors[0].full_name + (publication.presentation_authors.length > 1 ? ' et al' : '') }}. This is an open access publication distributed under the terms of the CC BY 4.0 License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Check the {{ publicationType | capitalize }} Source for copyright and license information. Listen on

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2025) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-05-20T01:45:00.602351+00:00
unpaywall
last seen: 2026-05-22T02:00:06.705733+00:00
License: CC-BY-4.0