[myNXTact]

Could someone grade the explanation I gave my non-technical boss last week?

In the context of a regression analysis, I said, "P-values indicate the chance that the apparent effect of the variable is from random fluctuations in the data instead of the variable itself."

[tedsanders]

I would grade this explanation poorly, because it is wrong.

It's impossible to know the odds of an apparent effect coming from random data fluctuations or a real effect. The p-value cannot tell you these odds. The p-value only tells you one half of that---the odds that random fluctuations would cause an apparent effect.

[analog31]

While we're at it, let's try this one too: The p-value, if correctly computed, is the probability that data collected under different conditions actually come from the same distribution. My definition sidesteps the word "effect."

[myNXTact]

My two cents is that once you start talking about "distributions" you add a layer of obfuscation that makes it a non-intuitive explanation.

[analog31]

Thanks. That's a good point. I wonder if there's a better term, or way of explaining it.