Statistical reporting inconsistencies in experimental linguistics

The present article investigates the prevalence of statistical reporting inconsistencies across articles in thirteen experimental linguistics journals published between 2000 and 2023. Using the R package Statcheck, we retrieved 82,991 statistical tests from 13,065 articles and assessed whether p-values were consistent with their test statistic and degrees of freedom. Almost half of the articles (49%) that used null-hypothesis significance testing contained at least one inconsistent p-value. Around one in eight articles (12%) contained an inconsistency that may have affected the statistical conclusion. The inconsistency rates were comparable across journals and seem stable over publication years. We discuss possible reasons for this high rate and offer actionable steps for authors, reviewers, and editors to remedy this state of affairs.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Glossa Psycholinguistics
Published
2025-10-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5070/g6011.47896
Primary Topic
Natural Language Processing Techniques
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Statistical reporting inconsistencies in experimental linguistics

Timo B. Roettger, Dara-Leonard Jenssen Etemady
Glossa Psycholinguistics
Natural Language Processing Techniques
article

Statistical reporting inconsistencies in experimental linguistics

Timo B. Roettger, Dara-Leonard Jenssen Etemady
article en

Abstract

The present article investigates the prevalence of statistical reporting inconsistencies across articles in thirteen experimental linguistics journals published between 2000 and 2023. Using the R package Statcheck, we retrieved 82,991 statistical tests from 13,065 articles and assessed whether p-values were consistent with their test statistic and degrees of freedom. Almost half of the articles (49%) that used null-hypothesis significance testing contained at least one inconsistent p-value. Around one in eight articles (12%) contained an inconsistency that may have affected the statistical conclusion. The inconsistency rates were comparable across journals and seem stable over publication years. We discuss possible reasons for this high rate and offer actionable steps for authors, reviewers, and editors to remedy this state of affairs.

Glossa PsycholinguisticsVol. 4(1)
Scandinavian Business Seating (Norway) (NO)
Openalex Percentile: Top 85%
Natural Language Processing Techniques
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.