"Don’t base your conclusions solely on whether an association or effect was found to be “statistically significant” (i.e., the p-value passed some arbitrary threshold such as p < 0.05).
Don’t believe that an association or effect exists just because it was statistically significant.
Don’t believe that an association or effect is absent just because it was not statistically significant.
Don’t believe that your p-value gives the probability that chance alone produced the observed association or effect or the probability that your test hypothesis is true.
Don’t conclude anything about scientific or practical importance based on statistical significance (or lack thereof)."
Hopefully this can help address the replication crisis[0] in (social) science.
Don’t believe that an association or effect exists just because it was statistically significant.
Don’t believe that an association or effect is absent just because it was not statistically significant.
Don’t believe that your p-value gives the probability that chance alone produced the observed association or effect or the probability that your test hypothesis is true.
Don’t conclude anything about scientific or practical importance based on statistical significance (or lack thereof)."
Hopefully this can help address the replication crisis[0] in (social) science.
[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis
Edit: Formatting (sorry formatting is hopeless).