I suppose a bit of methods nitpicking is in order. Wouldn't it make a lot more sense to use equivalence testing if one wants to write a statement like "Indeed,

I suppose a bit of methods nitpicking is in order. Wouldn't it make a lot more sense to use equivalence testing if one wants to write a statement like "Indeed, statistical significance testing revealed no difference between students of any tier when it came to interview performance." AFAIK statistical significance testing cannot reveal this at all. Of course there is no real explanation of the method that was used besides the fact that it was some sort of "statistical significance testing". Equivalence testing makes more sense to me if one wants to essentially say that MIT is Aspirin but Ohio State is a generic drug that is similar enough to work just as well (for a reasonable definition of similar enough).