A Missed Opportunity for Clarity
Problems in the Reporting of Effect Size Estimates in Infant Developmental Science
Dados Bibliográficos
| ID | 16782872 |
|---|---|
| Autores | Laura Mills‐Smith (0000-0001-7979-9457, Virginia Tech, autor correspondente), Derek P Spangler (0000-0001-7172-9083, Virginia Tech, autor correspondente), Robin Panneton (0000-0001-6519-8319, Virginia Tech), Matthew S Fritz (0000-0002-5885-6341, University of Nebraska–Lincoln) |
| Ano | 2015 |
| Volume | 20 |
| Fascículo | 4 |
| Páginas | 416-432 |
| Data de publicação | 2015-07-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Sim |
| Open Access | Sim |
| Tipo | ARTICLE |
| Periódico | Infancy (JOURNAL) |
| Identificadores do periódico | ISSN: 1525-0008 • E-ISSN: 1532-7078 |
| Editora | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/infa.12078 |
| OpenAlex | W2066219379 |
| Idioma | EN |
| Citações recebidas | 4 |
| Referências citadas | 23 |
Several years ago, the American Psychological Association began requiring that effect size estimates be reported to provide a better indication of the associative strength between factors and dependent measures in empirical studies ( Publication manual of the American Psychological Association , 2010, Author, Washington, DC). Accordingly, developmental journals require/strongly recommend effect size estimates be included in published work. Potentially, this trend has important benefits for infancy research given some of the inherent difficulties in establishing conceptually strong findings when often facing highly variable performance in typically small samples. This study examined recent infant research from select journals for accuracy and interpretative value of effect size estimates. Demographics, sample size, design, and statistical data were coded from 158 published (2007–2012) articles presenting 878 effect size estimates from experimental findings with infants using behavioral methods. Descriptive and distribution statistics were calculated for the following variables: (1) statistical tests, (2) effect size parameters, and (3) effect size interpretations. Although partial eta squared ( ) and eta squared ( η 2 ) were most common (49 and 42%, respectively), “ η confusion” was apparent, and interpretation of effect size estimates was virtually nonexistent. Thus, effect size estimates are not impacting infant development research in spite of criticisms of sole dependence on null hypothesis (e.g. American Psychologist , 49, 1994 and 997). Suggestions for increasing accuracy of effect size estimate selection and interpretative effect size estimate cutoffs are offered to improve empirical clarity
CLARITY · Econometrics · Null hypothesis · Sample size determination · Statistical hypothesis testing · Statistics · Cognitive Abilities and Testing · Mathematics · Meta-analysis and systematic reviews · Psychology · Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
Infant Perception and Cognition
How to Estimate and Interpret Various Effect Sizes.
Generalized Eta and Omega Squared Statistics
Effect size estimates
Eta Squared, Partial Eta Squared, and Misreporting of Effect Size in Communication Research
If Statistical Significance Tests are Broken/Misused, What Practices Should Supplement or Replace Them
Practical Significance
A History of Effect Size Indices
Cautionary Note on Reporting Eta-Squared Values from Multifactor Anova Designs
Eta-Squared and Partial Eta-Squared in Fixed Factor Anova Designs
The statistical power of abnormal-social psychological research
The earth is round (p < .05)
Statistical procedures and the justification of knowledge in psychological science
Statistical methods in psychology journals
A power primer
When small effects are impressive
| Obras citantes distintas | 4 |
|---|---|
| Citações por ano | 0,36 |
| Intervalo de citações | 2015 - 2021 (7) |
| Velocidade de citação | historical |
| Altamente citado | Não |
| Tipos de citação | Neutras: 4 |