Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Comment
  • Published:

Redefine statistical significance

We propose to change the default P-value threshold for statistical significance from 0.05 to 0.005 for claims of new discoveries.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Relationship between the P value and the Bayes factor.
Fig. 2: Relationship between the P value threshold, power, and the false positive rate.

References

  1. Greenwald, A. G. et al. Psychophysiology 33, 175–183 (1996).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Johnson, V. E. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 19313–19317 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Dreber, A. et al. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 15343–15347 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Johnson, V. E. et al. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 112, 1–10 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Begley, C. G. & Ioannidis, J. P. A. Circ. Res. 116, 116–126 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Kass, R. E. & Raftery, A. E. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 90, 773–795 (1995).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Szucs, D. & Ioannidis, J. P. A. PLoS Biol. 15, e2000797 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Open Science Collaboration. Science 349, aac4716 (2015).

  9. Camerer, C. F. et al. Science 351, 1433–1436 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Chavalarias, D. et al. JAMA 315, 1141–1148 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Gelman, A. & Carlin, J. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 9, 641–651 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Fanelli, D., Costas, R. & Ioannidis, J. P. A. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, 3714–3719 (2017).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Wasserstein, R. L. & Lazar, N. A. Am. Stat. 70, 129–133 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Fisher, R. A. Statistical Methods for Research Workers (Oliver & Boyd, Edinburgh, 1925).

  15. Sellke, T., Bayarri, M. J. & Berger, J. O. Am. Stat. 55, 62–71 (2001).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank D. L. Lormand, R. Royer and A. T. Nguyen Viet for excellent research assistance.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Daniel J. Benjamin, Magnus Johannesson or Valen E. Johnson.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

One of the 72 authors, Christopher Chambers, is a member of the Advisory Board of Nature Human Behaviour. Christopher Chambers was not a corresponding author and did not communicate with the editors regarding the publication of this article. The other authors declare no competing interests.

Electronic supplementary material

Supplementary information

Supplementary Methods

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Benjamin, D.J., Berger, J.O., Johannesson, M. et al. Redefine statistical significance. Nat Hum Behav 2, 6–10 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-017-0189-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-017-0189-z

This article is cited by

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing AI and Robotics

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: AI and Robotics newsletter — what matters in AI and robotics research, free to your inbox weekly.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing: AI and Robotics