The usual rule in statistics is that a study cannot find the null hypothesis to be true-one can only reject or fails to reject the null hypothesis is simply uninformative and such studies tend not to be published. Why is this a problem in the field of psychology and other behavioral sciences?
A)Much work could be avoided if people knew what interventions had not worked.
B)This may lead to ideas being assumed as true just because a few studies found results supporting them (while many more, unreported, had not).
C)Power and effect size considerations are getting ignored.
D)Both A and B are correct.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The problem described is known as the "file drawer problem," where studies that fail to reject the null hypothesis (i.e., find no effect) are less likely to be published. This leads to a publication bias, where only studies showing significant results are published, skewing the perception of effectiveness for certain interventions or theories. Option A highlights the inefficiency and potential waste in research efforts, as knowing what does not work can be as valuable as knowing what does. Option B points out the risk of assuming certain ideas are true based on a biased sample of published studies, ignoring the potentially larger number of studies that found no effect but were not published.

The Usual Rule in Statistics Is That a Study Cannot