Decisions under uncertainty: A statistical framework for evaluating practical relevance in interval-based hypothesis testing

Psychological researchers are increasingly encouraged to move beyond a narrow focus on detecting statistically significant effects that differ from zero. To interpret findings more meaningfully, best practices emphasize evaluating effect magnitude to determine whether it is practically meaningful or negligible. This requires specifying a smallest effect size of interest and conducting interval-based hypothesis tests. Although these approaches improve current practice by explicitly accounting for effect sizes, interval-based hypothesis tests can yield inconclusive results, leaving uncertainty about whether an effect is practically relevant or negligible. In this article, we first explain what interval-based hypothesis testing is and highlight challenges posed by inconclusive outcomes. We then propose a set of complementary tools implemented in an accompanying Web application ( https://paulriesthuis.github.io/SESOI-Decisions/ ) to support more informed decision-making under such uncertainty and help assess the practical relevance of results. These tools aim to help researchers draw more nuanced statistical and practical decisions and improve the interpretation of results obtained from interval-based hypothesis testing.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Behavior Research Methods
Published
2026-10-15
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-026-03204-9
Primary Topic
Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Decisions under uncertainty: A statistical framework for evaluating practical relevance in interval-based hypothesis testing

Nataly Beribisky, Paul Riesthuis, Rob Cribbie, Victoria Celio
Behavior Research Methods
Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
article

Decisions under uncertainty: A statistical framework for evaluating practical relevance in interval-based hypothesis testing

Nataly Beribisky, Paul Riesthuis, Rob Cribbie, Victoria Celio
article en

Abstract

Psychological researchers are increasingly encouraged to move beyond a narrow focus on detecting statistically significant effects that differ from zero. To interpret findings more meaningfully, best practices emphasize evaluating effect magnitude to determine whether it is practically meaningful or negligible. This requires specifying a smallest effect size of interest and conducting interval-based hypothesis tests. Although these approaches improve current practice by explicitly accounting for effect sizes, interval-based hypothesis tests can yield inconclusive results, leaving uncertainty about whether an effect is practically relevant or negligible. In this article, we first explain what interval-based hypothesis testing is and highlight challenges posed by inconclusive outcomes. We then propose a set of complementary tools implemented in an accompanying Web application ( https://paulriesthuis.github.io/SESOI-Decisions/ ) to support more informed decision-making under such uncertainty and help assess the practical relevance of results. These tools aim to help researchers draw more nuanced statistical and practical decisions and improve the interpretation of results obtained from interval-based hypothesis testing.

Behavior Research MethodsVol. 58(11)
Openalex Percentile: Top 88%
Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
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.