Statistical Inference Enables Bad Science; Statistical Thinking Enables Good Science

Abstract

Scientific research of all kinds should be guided by statistical thinking: in the design and conduct of the study, in the disciplined exploration and enlightened display of the data, and to avoid statistical pitfalls in the interpretation of the results. However, formal, probability-based statistical inference should play no role in most scientific research, which is inherently exploratory, requiring flexible methods of analysis that inherently risk overfitting. The nature of exploratory work is that data are used to help guide model choice, and under these circumstances, uncertainty cannot be precisely quantified, because of the inevitable model selection bias that results. To be valid, statistical inference should be restricted to situations where the study design and analysis plan are specified prior to data collection. Exploratory data analysis provides the flexibility needed for most other situations, including statistical methods that are regularized, robust, or nonparametric. Of course, no individual statistical analysis should be considered sufficient to establish scientific validity: research requires many sets of data along many lines of evidence, with a watchfulness for systematic error. Replicating and predicting findings in new data and new settings is a stronger way of validating claims than blessing results from an isolated study with statistical inferences.