2013
DOI: 10.1187/cbe.13-04-0082
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Other Half of the Story: Effect Size Analysis in Quantitative Research

Abstract: Effect size measures are a key complement to statistical significance testing when reporting quantitative research findings. The authors provide a rationale for use of effect size and specific tools and guidelines for interpretation of results.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
251
3
15

Year Published

2014
2014
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 359 publications
(271 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
2
251
3
15
Order By: Relevance
“…33,34 Effect size allows for comparisons across studies by reporting the strength of the treatment or intervention regardless of sample size. 33,35 For example, a comparison is made between a "flipped" course and a lecturebased course and reports a significant change in mean examination scores from 80% to 82% (with a standard deviation of 610). While this may be a significant change, the resultant effect size is 0.2 (ie, the average performance of a student in the "flipped" course is 0.2 standard deviations above the average performance in the "lecture" course).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…33,34 Effect size allows for comparisons across studies by reporting the strength of the treatment or intervention regardless of sample size. 33,35 For example, a comparison is made between a "flipped" course and a lecturebased course and reports a significant change in mean examination scores from 80% to 82% (with a standard deviation of 610). While this may be a significant change, the resultant effect size is 0.2 (ie, the average performance of a student in the "flipped" course is 0.2 standard deviations above the average performance in the "lecture" course).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Error bars represent 95% Highest Posterior Density, and are analogous in practice to 95% frequentist confidence intervals (Hadfield 2010). In keeping with the exploratory nature of this study, for the purposes of discussion we relax the credibility threshold to 90%, and additionally that displayed an effect size commensurate with other credible predictors (Kirk 1996, Coe 2002, Maher et al 2013). …”
Section: Fitted Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[12] In patients with CRS, specific immunoglobulin (Ig) E responses to S. aureus exotoxins were detected. [13] It was also reported that the SAgs may contribute to glucocorticoid insensitivity.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%