The Rise of Null Hypothesis Significance Testing (NHST): Institutional Massification and the Emergence of a Procedural Epistemology

Abstract

It has long been a puzzle why, despite sustained reform efforts, many applied scientific fields remain dominated by Null Hypothesis Significance Testing (NHST), a framework that dichotomizes study results and privileges "statistically significant" findings. This paper examines that puzzle by situating the development and rise of NHST within its historical and institutional context. Taking Actor-Network Theory as a point of entry, the analysis identifies the conditions under which particular inferential technologies stabilize and endure. The analysis shows that, although NHST does not resolve the technical problem of statistical inference, it came to dominate as a social technology that addressed the most pressing institutional challenge of the postwar period: the mass expansion of scientific networks. Under conditions of rapid institutional growth, NHST's technical slippages--purging research context and replacing epistemic judgment with mechanical procedures--became functional features rather than flaws. These features enabled procedural self-sufficiency across settings marked by heterogeneous goals and uneven expertise, thereby sealing NHST's position as the obligatory passage point in many postwar scientific fields.