1996
DOI: 10.1086/209469
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effect-Size Estimates: Issues and Problems in Interpretation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

8
187
0
9

Year Published

1998
1998
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 236 publications
(204 citation statements)
references
References 45 publications
8
187
0
9
Order By: Relevance
“…Thus, the Proc Mixed procedure with fixed and random effects was used to analyze these 2 measures. Instead of estimating effect sizes using the common index of partial 2 , given that we used the mixed-effect models with fixed and random effects, we estimated effect sizes by the intraclass coefficient (ICC), which has been recommended to be more suitable for models that include random effects and/or repeated measures designs (Fern and Monroe, 1996;Maxwell et al, 1981). Given the well-established female superiority in episodic memory (see Herlitz and Rehnman, 2008, for review) and earlier findings indicating that the BDNF polymorphism contributes to individual differences in episodic memory Hariri et al, 2003;Li et al, 358.e4 S.-C. Li et al / Neurobiology of Aging 34 (2013) 358.e1-358.e10 2010), both sex and the BDNF polymorphism were used as covariates in all subsequent analyses.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, the Proc Mixed procedure with fixed and random effects was used to analyze these 2 measures. Instead of estimating effect sizes using the common index of partial 2 , given that we used the mixed-effect models with fixed and random effects, we estimated effect sizes by the intraclass coefficient (ICC), which has been recommended to be more suitable for models that include random effects and/or repeated measures designs (Fern and Monroe, 1996;Maxwell et al, 1981). Given the well-established female superiority in episodic memory (see Herlitz and Rehnman, 2008, for review) and earlier findings indicating that the BDNF polymorphism contributes to individual differences in episodic memory Hariri et al, 2003;Li et al, 358.e4 S.-C. Li et al / Neurobiology of Aging 34 (2013) 358.e1-358.e10 2010), both sex and the BDNF polymorphism were used as covariates in all subsequent analyses.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The importance of this research, however, should not be judged by the magnitude of effect sizes. Like most consumer behavior research, our research selected the levels of the factors systematically based on theoretical considerations, which in the first place makes the effect-size estimates less informative for judging theoretical importance (see Fern and Monroe [1996] for a discussion of the difference between these models and the implications to effect sizes). Moreover, our findings provide evidence contrasting the viewpoint that existing theoretical frameworks on subjective experience effects (e.g., mood, metacognitive experience) have limited applicability in the choice domain.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This statistic focuses on between-group differences in experimental research and is suitable for contrasting two groups on dependent variables that are not operationalized in the same way. Effect sizes based on correlations, which are sometimes used in meta-analytic reviews, are especially recommended for estimating relationships in survey data (e.g., Fern and Monroe 1996).…”
Section: Meta-analytic Proceduresmentioning
confidence: 99%