A key challenge for interpreting published empirical research is the fact that published findings might be selected by researchers or by journals. Selection might be based on criteria such as significance, consistency with theory, or the surprisingness of findings or their plausibility. Selection leads to biased estimates, reduced coverage of confidence intervals, and distorted posterior beliefs. I review methods for detecting and quantifying selection based on the distribution of p-values, systematic replication studies, and meta-studies. I then discuss the conflicting recommendations regarding selection result ing from alternative objectives, in particular, the validity of inference versus the relevance of findings for decision-makers. Based on this discussion, I consider various reform proposals, such as deemphasizing significance, pre-analysis plans, journals for null results and replication studies, and a functionally differentiated publication system. In conclusion, I argue that we need alternative foundations of statistics that go beyond the single-agent model of decision theory.

中文翻译：

---

分叉路径和束缚手：选择性发表研究结果，经济学家应该怎么做

解释已发表的实证研究的一个关键挑战是，研究人员或期刊可能会选择已发表的研究结果。选择可能基于诸如重要性、与理论的一致性或发现的令人惊讶性或它们的合理性等标准。选择会导致估计有偏差、置信区间覆盖率降低和后验信念失真。我回顾了基于 p 值分布、系统复制研究和元研究的检测和量化选择的方法。然后，我讨论了关于由替代目标产生的选择的相互矛盾的建议，特别是推理的有效性与决策者的发现的相关性。基于这个讨论，我考虑了各种改革建议，例如淡化重要性，预分析计划、无效结果和复制研究期刊，以及功能差异化的出版系统。总之，我认为我们需要超越决策理论的单代理模型的替代统计基础。