Suggest that the call for more pointed graduate education and more affirmative journal policies on replication-extension made by R. Hubbard and P. Ryan is useful, although inadequate and probably pointless. Statistical significance testing appears to be here to stay despite the charge that it is of "marginal scientific value." (SLD)

Suggests that replication research and meta-analysis are not substitutes for statistical significance testing, but rather, like measures of effect size, they are complements to statistical significance testing. Significance testing does provide a means for determining what might be usefully replicated. (SLD)

The Hubbard and Ryan article is a little ingenuous in its implications for action. Both meta-analyses and replication have problems of their own; each requires careful attention. Good measurement emphasizes proper sampling techniques and using whatever means possible to analyze data. (SLD)

Agrees with R. Hubbard and P. Ryan that statistical significance testing has had a negative impact in that some users have closed their minds to alternative approaches to conducting research. In marketing, the alternatives are not completely satisfactory, however, and researchers are likely to continue to rely on statistical significance testing.…