Intersections of Statistical Significance and Substantive Significance: Pearson’s Correlation Coefficients Under a Known True Null Hypothesis
preprint
OA: closed
Abstract
The editors of a special issue of The American Statistician stated: “Regardless of whether it was ever useful, a declaration of “statistical significance” has today become meaningless.” This resonates with the author's view, as “statistical significance” has been conflated with substantive significance. However, the author disagrees with the editors' call for “don’t use it.” With relatively simple graphs and tables, this author demonstrates that small sample sizes (n < 1000) require Pearson’s correlation coefficients to be screened for statistical significance (p < .05) to reduce the number of effect size errors that would otherwise be considered substantively significant under a true null hypothesis. Note here that the null hypothesis is not merely assumed true but is indeed known to be true.
My notes (saved in your browser only)
Citation neighborhood (no data yet)
We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2024) — 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