When the BF and the classical results diverge
I sometimes get a questions such as "Why classical results are not significant, but BF shows evidence for X",. For example: " Results showed no main effect of type of activity, F(1,177) = 2.60, p = 0.11, ηp2 = 0.01, and no main effect of age group, F(2,177) = 1.33, p = 0.27, ηp2 = 0.02. Bayesian ANOVA, however, showed evidence for the presence of a main effect of type of activity, BFIncl = 126.73, and a main effect of age, BFIncl = 96.70".
To be honest, I never have good explanations why such differences occur. Can you recommend a reading (paper, bolg post etc), where I can get more info on the matter?
Thanks in advance,