I've been trying to not use the words "statistical significance" in my reports. It's hard to find alternatives, but "confident" usually fits the bill. Sadly,

I've been trying to not use the words "statistical significance" in my reports. It's hard to find alternatives, but "confident" usually fits the bill. Sadly, the reports need reviewed by other statisticians, and they much prefer I use the normal jargon because it's clearer to them. But these concepts aren't clear to the people using the data. I've seen people use statistical tests done in batch without correcting for multiple testing (one of my regrettable tasks), and flat out ignore any differences that weren't statistically significant. They thought it meant "no difference." With population-level data (e.g., Census counts or hospital records), I sometimes wonder if statistical significance has any value. It's a tool to make sure we don't accidentally claim a difference where there isn't one. But I can guarantee you that nothing worth measuring is exactly the same for men, women, whites, blacks, young, old, whatever. It'd be amazing if the difference was 0. So statistical significance ends up being an obfuscated way to state the sample size.