Understanding the New Statistics: Effect Sizes, Confidence Intervals, and Meta-Analysis

By Geoff Cumming. 2011

2,239 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c25343caafb67258fed65f8c0354798a456c3fff

How researchers see this paper

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

Citations in the corpus

Automating creativity assessment with SemDis: An open platform for computing semantic distance (2020, methodology): “The standardized effects are presented in the r metric and can be interpreted using the conventional small (.10), medium (.30), and large (.50) guidelines (Cumming, 2013).”
Necessary Condition Analysis (NCA) (2015, background): “Cumming (2012) discusses names and symbols for Cohen’s d effect size of the difference between means.”
Quantifying explained variance in multilevel models: An integrative framework for defining R-squared measures. (2019, background): “…article responds to widespread methodological recommendations to move beyond consideration of only statistical significance when fitting models (APA, 2009; Cumming, 2012; Harlow et al., 1997; Kelley & Preacher, 2012; Panter & Sterba, 2011; Wilkinson & APA Task Force on Statistical Inference, 1999).”
Individual differences in working memory and processing speed predict anticipatory spoken language processing in the visual world (2016, unknown): “Indeed, Fidler and Loftus (2009) provide evidence that reporting confidence intervals leads to much better interpretation of the results than a research report based on null-hypothesis testing (see Cumming, 2012, 2014, for extensive discussion).”
Reproducible research in sport and exercise psychology: The role of sample sizes (2016, methodology): “Suggested alternatives are the estimation of confidence intervals around effect sizes (Cumming, 2012; 2014) and Bayesian methods (Lee & Wagenmakers, 2005; Wagenmakers, 2007; Wetzels et al.”
Estimating the Reproducibility of Experimental Philosophy (2018, background): “The theoretical significance of an effect does not depend only on its existence but also on its size (Cumming, 2013).”
MULTIPLE REGRESSION AS A FLEXIBLE ALTERNATIVE TO ANOVA IN L2 RESEARCH (2016, background): “A useful alternative or supplement would be to report and interpret effect sizes and associated confidence intervals (for recent overviews on this issue, see Cumming, 2012; Norris, 2015; Plonsky, 2015b).”
The effects of personality traits, self-esteem, loneliness, and narcissism on Facebook use among university students (2012, background): “…and .08 for self-esteem and narcissism respectively, further work should consider the use of confidence intervals or combining the evidence across multiple studies involving Facebook as an approach to determine the extent to which these variables have an effect of Facebook use (see Cumming, 2011).”
Openness to experience and awe in response to nature and music: Personality and profound aesthetic experiences. (2015, methodology): “For correlations in the r metric, we used the common r = .10/.30/.50 benchmarks for small/medium/large effect sizes (see Cumming, 2012); 95% confidence intervals around the correlations are in square brackets.”
Sample Size Justification (2021, unknown): “Cumming (2013) calls the difference be-tween the observed effect size and the upper 95% confidence interval (or the lower 95% confidence interval) the margin of error.”
The Effects of Mindfulness Meditation: A Meta-Analysis (2012, background): “Please note that inferences on significance are somewhat limited if the sizes of the two CIs to be compared differ by more than a factor of 2 (Cumming and Finch 2005). The category mindfulness comprises different questionnaires of self-attributed mindfulness 180 Mindfulness (2012) 3:174–189”
Learning with retrieval-based concept mapping. (2014, methodology): “…“important” ideas under concept map 1 We report standardized mean differences (ds) and 95% confidence intervals around the effect size estimates (see Cumming, 2012), which were calculated using the Methods for the Behavioral, Educational, and Social Sciences (MBESS) package for R (Kelley, 2007).”
Taking Stock of the Relationship Between Gang Membership and Offending (2016, background): “To be sure, even the appearance of consistent or statistically significant findings in the literature falls short of a comprehensive understanding of this empirical relationship (Bushway, Sweeten, & Wilson, 2006; Cumming, 2012; Pratt, 2010).”