OBJECTIVE We examined the evolution of statistical reporting practices within forensic psychology across two decades (2000-2020) to assess their adherence to recommended best practices. METHOD We conducted a comprehensive analysis of articles published in six prominent forensic psychology journals, including every empirical article published in each journal in 2000, 2005, 2010, 2015, and 2020 (N = 813). We then evaluated the use and interpretation of null hypothesis significance testing (NHST), effect sizes (ESs), confidence intervals (CIs), and Bayesian statistics for each article in the sample. RESULTS We found a persistent reliance on NHST, with nearly all articles employing it for data analysis and interpretation. Encouragingly, the reporting of ESs and CIs has increased substantially; their interpretative use, however, remains limited. Bayesian methods were rarely used for analysis or interpretation of data. CONCLUSIONS These findings suggest a slow uptake of reforms advocated by statistical guidelines, with forensic psychology researchers continuing to prioritize NHST over recommended approaches. Although the increase in ES and CI reporting is encouraging, the continued reliance on NHST means that both the scientific literature and important applied decision making in the forensic psychology field are impacted by the shortcomings of this statistical reporting approach (e.g., simplistic dichotomous decisions, lack of reproducibility, potential for p-hacking). We call for journals in the field to encourage further use of statistical best practices within their manuscripts. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译：

---

法医心理学中的统计报告实践：有什么变化吗？


目的 我们研究了法医心理学二十年（2000-2020 年）中统计报告实践的演变，以评估他们对推荐最佳实践的遵守情况。方法 我们对在六种著名法医心理学期刊上发表的文章进行了全面分析，包括 2000 年、2005 年、2010 年、2015 年和 2020 年在每本期刊上发表的每一篇实证文章 （N = 813）。然后，我们评估了样本中每篇文章的零假设显著性检验 （NHST） 、效应量 （ESs） 、置信区间 （CIs） 和贝叶斯统计量的使用和解释。结果我们发现 NHST 持续依赖，几乎所有文章都使用它来进行数据分析和解释。令人鼓舞的是，ES 和 CI 的报告大幅增加;然而，它们的解释用途仍然有限。贝叶斯方法很少用于数据分析或解释。结论 这些发现表明，统计指南倡导的改革被缓慢接受，法医心理学研究人员继续优先考虑 NHST 而不是推荐的方法。尽管 ES 和 CI 报告的增加令人鼓舞，但对 NHST 的持续依赖意味着法医心理学领域的科学文献和重要应用决策都受到这种统计报告方法的缺点（例如，简单的二分决策、缺乏可重复性、潜在的 p-hacking）的影响。我们呼吁该领域的期刊鼓励在其手稿中进一步使用统计最佳实践。（PsycInfo 数据库记录 （c） 2025 APA，保留所有权利）。