Abstract
The effect size (ES) is the magnitude of a study outcome or research finding, such as the strength of the relationship obtained between an independent variable and a dependent variable. Two types of ES indicators are sampled here: the difference-type and the correlational (or r-type). Both are well suited to situations in which there are two groups or two conditions, whereas the r-type, used in association with focused statistical procedures (contrasts), is also ideal in situations where there are more than two groups or conditions and there are predicted overall patterns to be evaluated. Also discussed are procedures for computing confidence intervals and null-counternull intervals as well as a systematic approach to comparing and combining competing predictions expressed in the form of contrast weights and ES indicators.
References
2001). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (5th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
(1967). On method: Toward a reconstruction of psychological investigation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
(1962). The statistical power of abnormal-social psychological research: A review. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 65, 145–153.
(1969). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York: Academic Press.
(1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
(2009). Confidence intervals: Better answers to better questions. Zeitschrift für Psychologie / Journal of Psychology, 217, 15–26.
(1971). Design of experiments (8th ed.). New York: Hafner. (Reissued by Oxford University Press, 1990).
(1973). Statistical methods for research workers (14th ed.). New York: Hafner. (Reissued by Oxford University Press, 1990.)
(1989). The empire of chance: How probability changed science and everyday life. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
(1981). Meta-analysis in social research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
(1982). Estimation of effect size from a series of independent experiments. Psychological Bulletin, 92, 490–499.
(1985). Statistical methods for meta-analysis. New York: Academic Press.
(2004). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
(2005). An alternative to null-hypothesis significance tests. Psychological Science, 16, 345–353.
(1984). Essentials of behavioral research. New York: McGraw-Hill.
(1985). Contrast analysis: Focused comparisons in the analysis of variance. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
(2008). Essentials of behavioral research (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
(2000). Contrasts and effect sizes in behavioral research: A correlational approach. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
(1982). A simple general purpose display of magnitude of experimental effect. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 166–169.
(1994). The counternull value of an effect size: A new statistic. Psychological Science, 5, 329–334.
(2003). requivalent: A simple effect size estimator. Psychological Methods, 8, 492–496.
(1988). Focused tests of significance and effect size estimation in counseling psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 35, 203–208.
(1997). People studying people: Artifacts and ethics in behavioral research. New York: W.H. Freeman.
(2002). Contrasts and correlations in theory assessment. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 27, 59–66.
(2003). Effect sizes for experimenting psychologists. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57, 221–237.
(2008). Assessing the effect size of outcome research. In , Evidence-based outcome research: A practical guide to conducting randomized controlled trials for psychosocial interventions (pp. 379–401). New York: Oxford University Press.
(1960). The fallacy of the null-hypothesis significance test. Psychological Bulletin, 57, 416–428.
(2001). The lady tasting tea: How statistics revolutionized science in the twentieth century. New York: W.H. Freeman.
(1989). Do studies of statistical power have an impact on the power of studies? Psychological Bulletin, 105, 309–316.
(2005). New methods for comparing groups: Strategies for increasing the probability of detecting true differences. New Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 272–275.
(1999). Statistical methods in psychological journals: Guidelines and explanations. American Psychologist, 54, 594–604.
(