Statistical methods in psychology journals: Guidelines and explanations.

Wilkinson, Leland

doi:10.1037/0003-066x.54.8.594

Cited by 2,401 publications

(1,328 citation statements)

References 58 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

1,274

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A large percentage of articles published do not meet the recommendations of the APA Task Force on Statistical Inference. 6 For example, across the 20-year span for which we reviewed articles, only 26.3% and 9.7% of articles reported any reliability or validity data, respectively. Although these ratings were highest in the 2000 ratings, even those rates are quite low.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, even the most recent ratings (2000) display quite a low percentages of articles that meet the minimum standards of the APA Task Force on Statistical Inference. 6 …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Based largely on the APA Task Force on Statistical Inference, 6 items were chosen that assess specific methodologic features of a given article. For example, to identify the type of research design, there was an item assessing the specific research design employed in the study (e.g., cross-sectional, longitudinal) and another item assessing the nature of control/comparison groups.…”

Section: Assessment Of Research Design and Methodology In Each Articlementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, each scientific article was assessed with a rating scale derived from the American Psychological Association's (APA) Task Force on Statistical Inference. 6 The current report provided the consensus opinions of 16 statisticians, teachers of statistics, journal editors, authors of statistics books, computer experts, and others to ''elucidate some of the controversial issues surrounding applications of statistics including significance testing and its alternatives; alternative underlying models of data transformation; and newer methods made possible by powerful computers'' (p. 594). 6 The report provided recommendations for virtually all sections of a scientific article including the Method, Results, and Discussion.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…6 The current report provided the consensus opinions of 16 statisticians, teachers of statistics, journal editors, authors of statistics books, computer experts, and others to ''elucidate some of the controversial issues surrounding applications of statistics including significance testing and its alternatives; alternative underlying models of data transformation; and newer methods made possible by powerful computers'' (p. 594). 6 The report provided recommendations for virtually all sections of a scientific article including the Method, Results, and Discussion. We believe that the task force report provided the information needed to devise an objective rating scheme for the evaluation of scientific articles in the areas we wished to study.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

An empirical analysis of eating disorders and anxiety disorders publications (1980-2000)—part I: Research methods

Wonderlich

Crosby

Mitchell

et al. 2006

Int. J. Eat. Disord.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The current study compared the eating disorder and anxiety disorder literature in terms of research design and methodologic features in 1980, 1990, and 2000. Method: Computer literature searches were conducted using PubMed and PsychInfo databases to identify relevant eating disorder and anxiety disorder articles published at each of the three time points. A total of 456 articles were randomly selected, including 228 articles from the eating disorder literature and the anxiety disorder literature. Within each specific literature, one third (76) of the articles were selected from each of the three time points (1980, 1990, 2000). Two raters, from a team of eight trained raters, were randomly assigned to independently rate each article in terms of 75 separate methodologic features. Disagreements in ratings were resolved via consensus. Ratings were tabulated separately for eating disorders and anxiety disorders across the three time points.Results: Although there were some differences between anxiety disorders and eating disorders, most of the variables did not substantially differ between these two fields. There was a consistent trend for both fields to show increases in more rigorous methodologies over time. However, both the eating disorder literature and the anxiety disorder literature were characterized by a pervasive absence of many recommended methodologic procedures across the past two decades. Conclusion:Although the eating disorder literature and the anxiety disorder literature are increasingly characterized by improved reporting of rigorous methodologic procedures, there is still a pervasive absence of such procedures in both literatures, which limits the strength of inference in these studies.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, even the most recent ratings (2000) display quite a low percentages of articles that meet the minimum standards of the APA Task Force on Statistical Inference. 6 …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Assessment Of Research Design and Methodology In Each Articlementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

An empirical analysis of eating disorders and anxiety disorders publications (1980-2000)—part I: Research methods

Wonderlich

Crosby

Mitchell

et al. 2006

Int. J. Eat. Disord.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Exploring Risk Factors for the Emergence of Children's Mental Health Problems

Essex¹,

Kraemer²,

Armstrong³

et al. 2006

Arch Gen Psychiatry

192

138

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context: Exploratory studies that generate testable models of how risk factors for childhood mental health problems work together over time are critical for developing effective prevention and treatment strategies.Objective: To build models addressing the following 2 questions: (1) How early can we identify children at risk for mental health problems in third grade? (2) How do the risk factors work together over time?Design and Participants : We assessed a Wisconsin community sample 8 times, beginning during pregnancy. Three hundred seventy-nine families completed multi-informant reports (mothers, teachers, and children) of children's mental health symptoms in third grade. Main Outcome Measures: Symptom severity and directionality (externalizing vs internalizing).Results: The hypothesis was generated that family socioeconomic status (SES) defined different pathways to symptom severity. In low/middle SES families, children were at risk if their mothers were distressed during the infancy period, which was then associated with more generalized maternal and child distress and dysregulation during the preschool period. In high SES families, the picture was more complex, beginning with parental histories of depression and family psychopathology, which then led to greater family stress in the infancy period and maternal and child distress and dysregulation during the preschool period. For all children, social and academic impairment during the school transition was an important mediator. Two pathways to later symptom directionality consisted of one beginning with child sex and the other with child temperament.Conclusions: Most risk factors predicted symptom severity and not directionality. The risk factors for internalizing and externalizing problems may be much the same, and the same preventive interventions might be effective for both classes of problems. Furthermore, atrisk children from high SES families might be identifiable as early as infancy, whereas those from lower SES families may be identifiable only as preschoolers.

show abstract

Caution Regarding the Use of Pilot Studies to Guide Power Calculations for Study Proposals

Kraemer¹,

Mintz²,

Noda³

et al. 2006

Arch Gen Psychiatry

593

484

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Clinical researchers often propose (or review committees demand) pilot studies to determine whether a study is worth performing and to guide power calculations. The most likely outcomes are that (1) studies worth performing are aborted and (2) studies that are not aborted are underpowered. There are many excellent reasons for performing pilot studies. The argument herein is not meant to discourage clinical researchers from performing pilot studies (or review committees from requiring them) but simply to caution against their use for the objective of guiding power calculations.

show abstract

Statistical methods in psychology journals: Guidelines and explanations.

Cited by 2,401 publications

References 58 publications

An empirical analysis of eating disorders and anxiety disorders publications (1980-2000)—part I: Research methods

An empirical analysis of eating disorders and anxiety disorders publications (1980-2000)—part I: Research methods

Exploring Risk Factors for the Emergence of Children's Mental Health Problems

Caution Regarding the Use of Pilot Studies to Guide Power Calculations for Study Proposals

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About