2000
DOI: 10.1111/1467-9280.00287
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Contrasts and Correlations in Effect-Size Estimation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

3
269
0
6

Year Published

2003
2003
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 446 publications
(284 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
3
269
0
6
Order By: Relevance
“…To study the construct validity of CBD, subjects with and without CBD were compared on a series of continuous and dichotomous variables, using independent sample t-tests and Chi-square significance tests respectively. Effect sizes were calculated using the Odds Ratio's (ORs) and their 95% CI for categorical variables, and Cohen's d for continuous variables (Rosnow et al, 2000). Cohen's d is defined as the difference between two means divided by the pooled standard deviation.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To study the construct validity of CBD, subjects with and without CBD were compared on a series of continuous and dichotomous variables, using independent sample t-tests and Chi-square significance tests respectively. Effect sizes were calculated using the Odds Ratio's (ORs) and their 95% CI for categorical variables, and Cohen's d for continuous variables (Rosnow et al, 2000). Cohen's d is defined as the difference between two means divided by the pooled standard deviation.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The Pearson correlation coefficient (r) was calculated for each association. The r value is considered to be the preferred index in a correlational design (Durlak, 2009), with r being widely used to represent effect size in terms of the magnitude and direction of the relationship between the variables (Rosnow, Rosenthal, & Rubin, 2000). The R 2 values and the unstandardized coefficients for the y-intercept and learning approach score were also calculated.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the context of assessing mean effects, mean differences, and contrasts more generally, r can be interpreted as the partial correlation between the contrast weights and scores on the outcome variable, after having removed the group differences other than those associated with the contrast (Rosnow, Rosenthal, & Rubin, 2000). One benefit of expressing an effect size for a contrast as r is that it scales the effect to have an absolute magnitude between 0 and 1, with the sign indicating whether the trend in the group differences was in the direction predicted by the contrast weights or in the opposite direction.…”
Section: Pearson's Rmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…1. (This is algebraically equivalent to computing r from a t-test of a contrast as illustrated in Rosnow et al, 2000.) For a single mean effect, M, Eq.…”
Section: Pearson's Rmentioning
confidence: 99%