# Is this just a consequence of Publication bias or has a name of its own? [duplicate]

Scenario:

In our world, only statistically significant ($$p<0.05$$) results are published, everything else is rejected or not even handed in.

Let's now assume an experiment is $$100$$ times conducted and in truth $$H_0$$ holds. Since the $$p$$-value is uniformly distributed under $$H_0$$ (let's assume all conditions are satisfied) this would mean that on average $$5$$-paper could be handed in which all claim that they have found a statistically significant effect ($$p<0.05$$) and the academic world might actually believe in the alternative hypothesis $$H_1$$ although $$H_0$$ is actually true (of course no one would actually know that).

Question: Is this reasoning correct? I wonder how this reporting bias is called, it's different from the publication bias (or just a consequence and that's why it has name of its own?).

• These issues are discussed extensively on this page.
– EdM
Jan 13 '20 at 16:42
• @EdM thanks! I'd say it answers my question more or less - definitely helpful to anyone who is also having this kind of question! Jan 13 '20 at 18:03

This effect is a form of publication bias, but also an effect of wholesale adoption of significance at P $$\leq$$ 0.05, ignoring effect size, and the crisis of reproducibility in science.