Papers › If your P value looks too good to be true, it probably is: Communicating...

If your P value looks too good to be true, it probably is: Communicating reproducibility and variability in cell biology

8 Nov 2019arXiv:1911.03509archive 2025-07-28

Samuel J. Lord, Katrina B. Velle, R. Dyche Mullins, Lillian K. Fritz-Laylin

The cell biology literature is littered with erroneously tiny P values, often the result of evaluating individual cells as independent samples. Because readers use P values and error bars to infer whether a reported difference would likely recur if the experiment were repeated, the sample size N used for statistical tests should actually be the number of times an experiment is performed, not the number of cells (or subcellular structures) analyzed across all experiments. P values calculated using the number of cells do not reflect the reproducibility of the result and are thus highly misleading. To help authors avoid this mistake, we provide examples and practical tutorials for creating figures that communicate both the cell-level variability and the experimental reproducibility.

PaperPDFCode

Code

duzzio/Superplots_R_script mentioned on GitHub report

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections