Effect Size Estimation: Factors to Consider and Mistakes to Avoid

By J. Breaugh. 2003

163 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Applied Psychology, Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/591aeda0b2a58db9656dec0270aef0ac3499674a

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Applied Psychology

In Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

In Statistics and Probability

Citations in the corpus

A systematic review of effect size in software engineering experiments (2007, background): “Hence, observed effect sizes must be judged in context [2,9,18,21,35,36,41,42,45].”
Work–Family Conflict: The Importance of Family-Friendly Employment Practices and Family-Supportive Supervisors (2008, background): “Secondly, in a number of contexts, it has been shown that what appear to be small effects can have important consequences (Breaugh 2003).”
Effect size and power in assessing moderating effects of categorical variables using multiple regression: a 30-year review. (2005, background): “Several additional illustrations of the impact of what may be conventionally considered “small” effects on science and practice are provided by Breaugh (2003), Fichman (1999), and Olejnik and Algina (2000).”
Your Chi-Square Test Is Statistically Significant: Now What?. (2015, unknown): “However, the phi coefficient (as well as Cramer’s V, identical to the phicoefficient for a 2 x 2 contingency table) is strongly affected by differences in the row and column marginals and therefore underestimates the magnitude of the effect (see Breaugh, 2003; Haddock et al., 1998). For example, if ”
Late-career entrepreneurship, income and quality of life (2017, background): “Please cite this article as: Kautonen, T., et al., Late-career entrepreneurship, income and quality of life, J. Bus. Venturing (2017), http://dx.”
Relative Size versus Controlling for Size (2005, background): “There is a substantial literature on the error in this simplistic notion of relating the magnitude of explained variance to the importance of a variable (Breaugh 2003, Fichman 1999, Prentice and Miller 1992, Rosenthal and Rubin 1979).”
Effect size, confidence interval and statistical significance: a practical guide for biologists (2007, methodology): “…& Omland, 2004; Stephens et al., 2005; note that the IT approach often results in more than one ‘important’ model, in which parameters, or effect sizes, can be calculated as weighted means according to a weight given to each remaining model; for detailed procedures, see Burnham & Anderson, 2002).”
Self‐Disclosure in Social Media: Extending the Functional Approach to Disclosure Motivations and Characteristics on Social Network Sites (2014, background): “Relational development and social validation goals had the largest effects, as measured by the ratio of indirect to direct effect (Breaugh, 2003), with the indirect effect of relational goal about 4.”
Mental health of sexual minorities. A systematic review (2015, background): “These interpretations follow conventions (Breaugh, 2003; Ferguson, 2009; Haddock et al., 1998), except that we categorized very small effects as ‘zero or close to zero’ difference (OR/RR 1.2, d 0.1).”