conventional significance

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "conventional significance" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used to refer to the commonly accepted meaning or importance of something within a particular context or field. Example: "In literature, the conventional significance of a red rose often symbolizes love and passion."

✓ Grammatically correct

Science

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

54 human-written examples

The results in Table 2 suggest that the large majority of the single coefficients are statistically significant at conventional significance levels.

Financial Innovation

To data, although no locus for DR from genome-wide association study (GWAS) has reached conventional significance criteria, but a significant number of genes and genetic variants have been proposed for DR or proliferative DR through candidate gene approach [ 10, 11].

BMC Endocrine Disorders

All parameters are statistically significant to any conventional significance level.

IZA Journal of Labor Economics

The evidence shows that these instruments were not jointly significant in the main equation for migration flows at the conventional significance levels.

SERIEs

We cannot reject the hypothesis that the two coefficients are the same at conventional significance levels.

Health Economics Review

The null hypothesis of no serial correlation, normality and homoscedasticity cannot be rejected at conventional significance levels.

IZA Journal of Labor Policy

Human-verified similar examples from authoritative sources

Similar Expressions

6 human-written examples

Statistical significance was determined according to the conventional significance-level of α =5%.

BMC Cancer

Random effects analysis just failed to reach conventional statistical significance (random effects RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.03, test for overall effect p = 0.08).

International Journal of Bipolar Disorders

This looks like a big advantage for the taller candidate but it is just short of conventional statistical significance (5percentt probability of error).

Huffington Post

Notably, a change in rate of all clinical MRSA isolations in December 2002 could first be detected with conventional statistical significance by August 2003 (p = 0.03).

Plosone

All analyses used the conventional 5% significance level.

Archives of Disease in Childhood

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When using "conventional significance" in scientific writing, always specify the significance level (e.g., p < 0.05) to avoid ambiguity.

Common error

Don't assume all readers understand the "conventional significance" level in your field. Briefly explain its meaning or provide a citation for readers from other disciplines.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "conventional significance" functions as a noun phrase, where "conventional" modifies "significance". It describes a widely accepted or standard level of statistical importance. As Ludwig AI suggests, it refers to something commonly understood within a field.

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

Science

100%

Less common in

News & Media

0%

Formal & Business

0%

Academia

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, "conventional significance" is a phrase used to describe a standard or widely accepted threshold for statistical significance, particularly in scientific research. As Ludwig AI confirms, it's grammatically correct and frequently used. While often set at p < 0.05, understanding and specifying this level is crucial for clear communication. While alternatives like "standard significance" or "typical significance" exist, it's important to maintain precision when discussing statistical findings. Remember that statistical significance doesn't automatically imply practical importance; consider effect size and real-world implications as well.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

typical significance

This alternative replaces "conventional" with "typical", emphasizing the common or usual nature of the significance.

standard significance

Using "standard" instead of "conventional" highlights the established or accepted level of importance.

general significance

This alternative broadens the scope, suggesting a widespread or common level of importance rather than a specifically agreed-upon one.

customary significance

Substituting "conventional" with "customary" emphasizes the traditional or habitual aspect of the significance.

usual significance

This alternative focuses on the common or expected importance.

commonly accepted significance

This explicitly states that the significance is widely agreed upon, clarifying the 'conventional' aspect.

established importance

This phrase shifts from 'significance' to 'importance' while highlighting that it is well accepted.

recognized importance

This highlights the awareness and acknowledgement of the significance, which is slightly different from the agreed-upon meaning.

traditional meaning

This alternative shifts the focus to the meaning rather than the importance, emphasizing its established nature.

historical significance

Adding 'historical' specifies the significance is due to its long-standing presence or impact.

FAQs

How is "conventional significance" used in research?

In research, "conventional significance" typically refers to a predetermined threshold (like p < 0.05) for determining whether a result is statistically significant. It's used to decide if an effect is likely real, rather than due to random chance.

What's a synonym for "conventional significance"?

Alternatives for "conventional significance" include "standard significance", "typical significance", or "established importance". The best choice depends on the specific context.

Is a result at "conventional significance" always important?

Not necessarily. "Conventional significance" indicates statistical reliability but doesn't guarantee practical importance. A result could be statistically significant but have a small effect size, making it less meaningful in real-world applications.

What does it mean if a result fails to reach "conventional significance"?

If a result doesn't reach "conventional significance", it means the evidence isn't strong enough to reject the null hypothesis. This doesn't necessarily mean there's no effect, just that the study couldn't reliably detect it, perhaps due to a small sample size or high variability.