Effect size, power, and sample size determination for structured means modeling and mimic approaches to between-groups hypothesis testing of means on a single latent construct

By G. R. Hancock. 2001

271 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Computer Networks and Communications, Management Science and Operations Research, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/8b1d2189247bb70afda20ef478969f07b3b1c78e

How researchers see this paper

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

In Computer Networks and Communications

In Management Science and Operations Research

In Statistics and Probability

Citations in the corpus

Fortune Cookies, Measurement Error, And Experimental Design (2003, methodology): “With regard to increasing the number of variables, for the MIMIC strategy sample size decreases correspondingly (holding all else constant); this is because distributional noncentrality varies directly with construct reliability as measured by H (Hancock, 2001), which increases with the addition of ”
Social influences, school motivation and gender differences: an application of the expectancy‐value theory (2011, methodology): “To further examine the magnitude of the latent mean differences, standardised effect size (ES) statistics were computed based on the approach proposed by Hancock ( 2001 ).”
Social physique anxiety and physical activity: a self-determination theory perspective. (2009, methodology): “In addition, the standardized effect sizes for these mean-level differences were computed (Hancock, 2001) and were interpreted as small (.”
Relationships Between Self-Determination and Postschool Outcomes for Youth With Disabilities (2015, unknown): “In addition to invariance testing, latent effect sizes (d; Hancock, 2001) between-group were calculated using the formula below: 3 provides the means for the control and treatment group and the latent effect size estimates.”
Prevention of Cyberbullying and Cyber Victimization: Evaluation of the ViSC Social Competence Program (2015, methodology): “In Table 6, the results of the bivariate multiple group LCS model including the estimated mean change of cyberbullying and cyber victimization in the control and intervention group as well as the mean difference between the estimates in the control and intervention group and the effect size latent d”
Self-Efficacy for Self-Regulated Learning (2008, background): “Effect sizes (see Hancock, 2001; Thompson & Green, 2006) for these differences were also calculated.”
Linking Academic Entitlement and Student Incivility Using Latent Means Modeling (2013, methodology): “The unstandardized latent difference value is difficult to interpret; thus, we calculated a standardized latent effect size that is analogous to Cohen’s d (i.e., estimates the standard deviation difference in latent AE between the groups; Hancock, 2001).”