I feel like the authors should address this by either adopting a more conservative value of p (instead of the usual p=.05), or by adding some note of caution in the discussion for those results that are only marginally significant.
1
—
—
I feel like the authors should address this by either adopting a more conservative value of p (instead of the usual p=.05), or by adding some note of caution in the discussion for those results that are only marginally significant.