This article discusses the importance of equivalence testing in psychological research, which allows researchers to determine whether an effect is small enough to be considered trivial. Traditional significance tests often lead to incorrect conclusions about the absence of an effect, as a non-significant result does not prove there is no effect. Equivalence tests, such as the two one-sided tests (TOST) procedure, enable researchers to statistically reject effects that are large enough to be considered meaningful. The TOST procedure involves setting upper and lower equivalence bounds based on the smallest effect size of interest (SESOI), and then testing whether the observed effect falls within these bounds. This approach is conceptually straightforward and similar to traditional hypothesis tests, but it allows researchers to reject the presence of effects that are too large to be practically meaningful. The article provides practical guidance on performing equivalence tests, including the use of a spreadsheet and R package to facilitate these tests. It also discusses the importance of prespecifying equivalence bounds based on theoretical or practical considerations. The article highlights the benefits of using equivalence tests, such as improving statistical and theoretical inferences, reducing misinterpretations of non-significant results, and allowing researchers to specify which effects they find worthwhile to examine. It also addresses challenges in setting equivalence bounds, such as the lack of clear theoretical or practical boundaries for effect sizes. The article concludes that equivalence testing is a valuable tool for psychological research, and that its adoption can lead to more accurate and meaningful conclusions about the presence or absence of effects.This article discusses the importance of equivalence testing in psychological research, which allows researchers to determine whether an effect is small enough to be considered trivial. Traditional significance tests often lead to incorrect conclusions about the absence of an effect, as a non-significant result does not prove there is no effect. Equivalence tests, such as the two one-sided tests (TOST) procedure, enable researchers to statistically reject effects that are large enough to be considered meaningful. The TOST procedure involves setting upper and lower equivalence bounds based on the smallest effect size of interest (SESOI), and then testing whether the observed effect falls within these bounds. This approach is conceptually straightforward and similar to traditional hypothesis tests, but it allows researchers to reject the presence of effects that are too large to be practically meaningful. The article provides practical guidance on performing equivalence tests, including the use of a spreadsheet and R package to facilitate these tests. It also discusses the importance of prespecifying equivalence bounds based on theoretical or practical considerations. The article highlights the benefits of using equivalence tests, such as improving statistical and theoretical inferences, reducing misinterpretations of non-significant results, and allowing researchers to specify which effects they find worthwhile to examine. It also addresses challenges in setting equivalence bounds, such as the lack of clear theoretical or practical boundaries for effect sizes. The article concludes that equivalence testing is a valuable tool for psychological research, and that its adoption can lead to more accurate and meaningful conclusions about the presence or absence of effects.