Practical significance: A concept whose time has come

Educational and Psychological Measurement

Volumn 56, Issue 5, 1996, Pages 746-759

  Kirk, Roger E ^a  

^a BAYLOR UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0030517592     PISSN: 00131644     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0013164496056005002     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Berkson, J. (1938). Some difficulties of interpretation encountered in the application of the chi-square test. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 33, 526-542.
2. Brewer, J. K. (1978). Effect size: The most troublesome of the hypothesis testing considerations. Phi Delta Kappa, 11, 1-10.
3. Carver, R. P. (1978). The case against statistical significance testing. Harvard Educational Review, 48, 378-399.
4. Cohen, J. (1962). The statistical power of abnormal-social psychological research: A review. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 65, 145-153.
5. Cohen, J. (1969). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York: Academic Press.
6. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
7. Cohen, J. (1990). Things I have learned (so far). American Psychologist, 45, 1304-1312.
8. Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155-159.
9. Cohen, J. (1994). The earth is round (p < .05). American Psychologist, 49, 997-1003.
10. Cooper, H., & Findley, M. (1982). Expected effect sizes: Estimates for statistical power analysis in social psychology. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 8, 168-173.
11. Cramér, H. (1946). Mathematical methods of statistics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
12. Cronbach, L. J. (1975). Beyond two disciplines of scientific psychology. American Psychologist, 30, 116-127.
13. Dar, R. (1987). Another look at Meehl, Lakatos, and the scientific practices of psychologists. American Psychologists, 42, 145-151.
14. Falk, R., & Greenbaum, C. W. (1995). Significance tests die hard: The amazing persistence of a probabilistic misconception. Theory & Psychology, 5, 75-98.
15. Fisher, R. A. (1921). On the "probable error" of a coefficient of correlation deduced from a small sample. Metron, 1, 1-32.
16. Fisher, R. A. (1925). Statistical methods for research workers. London: Oliver & Boyd.
17. Fleishman, A. I. (1980). Confidence intervals for correlation ratios. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 40, 659-670.
18. Fleiss, J. L. (1969). Estimating the magnitude of experimental effects. Psychological Bulletin, 72, 273-276.
19. Fowler, R. L. (1985). Point estimates and confidence intervals in measures of association. Psychological Bulletin, 98, 160-165.
20. Glass, G. V. (1976). Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis of research. Educational Researcher, 5, 3-8.
21. Glass, G. V., & Hakstian, A. R. (1969). Measures of association in comparative experiments: Their development and interpretation. American Educational Research Journal, 6, 403-414.
22. Guttman, L. (1985). The illogic of statistical inference for cumulative science. Applied Stochastic Models and Data Analysis, 1, 3-10.
23. Haase, R. F., Waechter, D. M., & Solomon, G. S. (1982). How significant is a significant difference? Average effect size of research in counseling psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 29, 58-65.
24. Hays, W. L. (1963). Statistics for psychologists. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
25. Hedges, L. V. (1981). Distributional theory for Glass's estimator of effect size and related estimators. Journal of Educational Statistics, 6, 107-128.
26. Hedges, L. V., & Olkin, I. (1985). Statistical methods for meta-analysis. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
27. Kelley, T. L. (1935). An unbiased correlation ratio measure. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 21, 554-559.
28. Kendall, M. G. (1963). Rank correlation methods (3rd ed.). London: Griffin.
29. Kirk, R. E. (Ed.). (1972). Statistical issues. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
30. Lykken, D. T. (1968). Statistical significance in psychological research. Psychological Bulletin, 70, 151-159.
31. McGraw, K. O., & Wong, S. P. (1992). A common language effect size statistic. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 361-365.
32. Meehl, P. E. (1967). Theory testing in psychology and physics: A methodological paradox. Philosophy of Science, 34, 103-115.
33. Meehl, P. E. (1978). Theoretical risks and tabular asterisks: Sir Karl, Sir Ronald, and the slow progress of soft psychology. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 46, 806-834.
34. Morrison, D. E., & Henkel, R. E. (Eds.). (1970). The significance test controversy. Chicago: Aldine.
35. Neyman, J., & Pearson, E. S. (1928). On the use and interpretation of certain test criteria for purposes of statistical inference. Biometrika, 29A, Part I: 175-240; Part II: 263-294.
36. Neyman, J., & Pearson, E. S. (1928). On the use and interpretation of certain test criteria for purposes of statistical inference. Biometrika, 29A, Part I: 175-240; Part II: 263-294.
37. Oakes, M. (1986). Statistical inference: A commentary for the social and behavioral sciences. New York: John Wiley.
38. Pearson, K. (1901). On the correlation of characters not quantitatively measurable. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 195, 1-47.
39. Peters, C. C., & VanVoorhis, W. R. (1940). Statistical procedures and their mathematical bases. New York: McGraw-Hill.
40. Preece, P.F.W. (1983). A measure of experimental effect size based on success rates. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 43, 763-766.
41. Rosenthal, R. (1978). Combining results of independent studies. Psychological Bulletin, 85, 185-193.
42. Rosenthal, R., & Rubin, D. B. (1982). A simple, general purpose display of magnitude of experimental effect. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 166-169.
43. Rosenthal, R., & Rubin, D. B. (1989). Effect size estimation for one-sample multiple-choice-type data: Design, analysis, and meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 106, 332-337.
44. Rosenthal, R., & Rubin, D. B. (1994). The counternull value of an effect size: A new statistic. Psychological Science, 5, 329-334.
45. Rosnow, R., & Rosenthal, R. (1989). Statistical procedures and the justification of knowledge in psychological science. American Psychologist, 44, 1276-1284.
46. Rozeboom, W. W. (1960). The fallacy of the null hypothesis significance test. Psychological Bulletin, 57, 416-428.
47. Schmidt, F. (1996a). APA Board of Scientific Affairs to study issue of significance testing, make recommendations. Score, 19, 1, 6.
48. Schmidt, F. (1996b). Statistical significance testing and cumulative knowledge in psychology: Implications for the training of researchers. Psychological Methods, 1, 115-129.
49. Sedlmeier, P., & Gigerenzer, G. (1989). Do studies of statistical power have an effect on the power of studies? Psychological Bulletin, 105, 309-316.
50. Shulman, L. S. (1970). Reconstruction of educational research. Review of Educational Research, 40, 371-393.
51. Tang, P. C. (1938). The power function of the analysis of variance tests with tables and illustrations of their use. Statistics Research Memorandum, 2, 126-149.
52. Tatsuoka, M. M. (1973). An examination of the statistical properties of a multivariate measure of strength of association. (Final Report to U.S. Office of Education on Contract No. OEG-5-72-0027.)
53. Thompson, B. (Ed.). (1993). Statistical significance testing in contemporary practice: Some proposed alternatives with comments from journal editors. Journal of Experimental Education, 61(4).
54. Thompson, B. (1996). AERA editorial policies regarding statistical significance testing: Three suggested reforms. Educational Researcher, 25, 26-30.
55. Tukey, J. W. (1991). The philosophy of multiple comparisons. Statistical Science, 6, 100-116.
56. Yates, F. (1951). The influence of "statistical methods for research workers" on the development of the science of statistics. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 46, 19-34.