# Which statistical analysis software do data scientists and researchers actually trust for producing results they can publish or present to clients with confidence?

<p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true">This is really about credibility, results you'd put in a paper or in front of a client, so I pulled reviews about trust, reproducibility and defensible output.</p><ul>
<li>
<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/ibm-spss-statistics/reviews"><strong>IBM SPSS Statistics</strong></a>: Reviewers call it "the standard" and cite reliable, consistent methods they operationalize confidently for reporting and decision support. The common gripe is the aging interface.</li>
<li>
<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/stata/reviews"><strong>Stata</strong></a>: Heavily used in academia and research per reviewers, with reproducible do-files that make published analysis easy to rerun and defend.</li>
<li>
<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/sas-sas-viya/reviews"><strong>SAS Viya</strong></a>: Reviewers point to explainable, auditable analytics trusted by business and regulators alike, useful when a client or reviewer will scrutinize the method.</li>
<li>
<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/graphpad-prism/reviews"><strong>GraphPad Prism</strong></a> : Reviewers rely on it for publication-quality graphs and analyses in scientific articles and theses.</li>
</ul><p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true">What earns trust for you, the tool's reputation with reviewers and journals, or reproducibility you can hand off? And has a client or peer reviewer ever pushed back on a tool choice?</p>

##### Post Metadata
- Posted at: 6 days ago
- Net upvotes: 1


## Comments
### Comment 1

&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;background-color: transparent; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);&quot;&gt;Trust in published work comes down to reproducibility more than reputation: a reviewer can&#39;t argue with an analysis they can rerun from a script and get the same result. That&#39;s why code or command-file-based tools tend to win in academia, since the do-file is the defense when someone questions the method. Reputation with journals helps you get in the door, but reproducibility is what survives the peer review once you&#39;re there.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

##### Comment Metadata
- Posted at: 6 days ago
- Author title: Marketing





## Related discussions
- [How well does Trello scale into a larger team?](https://www.g2.com/discussions/1-how-well-does-trello-scale-into-a-larger-team)
  - Posted at: about 13 years ago
  - Comments: 6
- [Can we please add a new section](https://www.g2.com/discussions/2-can-we-please-add-a-new-section)
  - Posted at: about 13 years ago
  - Comments: 0
- [Quantifiable benefits from implementing your CRM](https://www.g2.com/discussions/quantifiable-benefits-from-implementing-your-crm)
  - Posted at: about 13 years ago
  - Comments: 4