P-values are not good measures for reliability, because they absolutely are not the same thing as the chance that a result is wrong. This confusion, and ignorance of the prior probability of hypotheses is the reason why replication rates are so bad.
In physics you can get away with not caring about the distinction, because of how accurate the measurements and precise the theories are. That doesn't fly in most other sciences, though.
> P-values are not good measures for reliability, because they absolutely are not the same thing as the chance that a result is wrong
As an undergrad, I even had tenured professors try to tell me that a p-value is the chance that a result is wrong. Most researchers in psych or bio sciences have a weak understanding of statistics, usually taking a single statistics class in undergrad, then a single one in grad.
In physics you can get away with not caring about the distinction, because of how accurate the measurements and precise the theories are. That doesn't fly in most other sciences, though.