Role of effect sizes in contemporary research in counseling

Counseling and Values

Volumn 50, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 176-186

  Thompson, Bruce ^a,b  

^a TEXAS A AND M UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 78049467332     PISSN: 01607960     EISSN: 2161007X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/j.2161-007X.2006.tb00054.x     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Abelson, R. P., (1997). A retrospective on the significance test ban of 1999 (If there were no significance tests, they would be invented). In L. L.Harlow, S. A.Mulaik & J. H.Steiger (Eds.), What if there were no significance tests (pp. 117-141) Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
2. American Psychological Association. (2001). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (5th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
3. Anderson, D. R., Burnham, K. P., and Thompson, W., (2000). Null hypothesis testing: Problems, prevalence, and an alternative. Journal of Wildlife Management, 64, 912-923.
4. Bagozzi, R. P., Fornell, C., and Larcker, D. F., (1981). Canonical correlation analysis as a special case of a structural relations model. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 16, 437-454.
5. Capraro, R. M., and Capraro, M., (2002). Treatments of effect sizes and statistical significance tests in textbooks. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 62, 771-782.
6. Carver, R., (1978). The case against statistical significance testing. Harvard Educational Review, 48, 378-399.
7. Cohen, J., (1968). Multiple regression as a general data-analytic system. Psychological Bulletin, 70, 426-443.
8. Cohen, J., (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
9. Cohen, J., (1994). The earth is round (p < .05). American Psychologist, 49, 997-1003.
10. Ezekiel, M., (1930). Methods of correlational analysis. New York: Wiley.
11. Fidler, F., (2002). The fifth edition of the APA Publication Manual: Why its statistics recommendations are so controversial. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 62, 749-770.
12. Glass, G. V., (1976). Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis of research. Educational Researcher, 5(10), 3-8.
13. Glass, G. V., McGaw, B., and Smith, M. L., (1981). Meta-analysis in social research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
14. Good, P. I., and Hardin, J. W., (2003). Common errors in statistics (and how to avoid them). New York: Wiley.
15. Grissom, R., and Kim, J. J., (2005). Effect sizes for research: A broad practical approach. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
16. Harlow, L. L., Mulaik, S. A. & Steiger, J. H. (Eds.). (1997). What if there were no significance tests? Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
17. Hays, W. L., (1981). Statistics (3rd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
18. Hess, B., Olejnik, S., and Huberty, C. J., (2001). The efficacy of two improvement-over-chance effect sizes for two-group univariate comparisons under variance heterogeneity and nonnormality. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 61, 909-936.
19. Huberty, C. J., (2002). A history of effect size indices. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 62, 227-240.
20. Huberty, C. J., and Holmes, S. E., (1983). Two-group comparisons and univariate classification. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 43, 15-26.
21. Huberty, C. J., and Lowman, L. L., (2000). Group overlap as a basis for effect size. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60, 543-563.
22. Huberty, C. J., and Morris, J. D., (1988). A single contrast test procedure. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 48, 567-578.
23. Johnson, D. H., (1999). The insignificance of statistical significance testing. Journal of Wildlife Management, 63, 763-772.
24. Kirk, R. E., (1996). Practical significance: A concept whose time has come. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56, 746-759.
25. Kirk, R. E., (2003). The importance of effect magnitude. In S. F.Davis (Ed.), Handbook of research methods in experimental psychology (pp. 83-105). Oxford, United Kingdom: Blackwell.
26. Kline, R., (2004). Beyond significance testing: Reforming data analysis methods in behavioral research. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
27. Knapp, T. R., (1978). Canonical correlation analysis: A general parametric significance testing system. Psychological Bulletin, 85, 410-416.
28. Robinson, D. H., and Wainer, H., (2002). On the past and future of null hypothesis significance testing. Journal of Wildlife Management, 66, 263-271.
29. Rosenthal, R., (1994). Parametric measures of effect size. In H.Cooper & L. V.Hedges (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis (pp. 231-244). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
30. Rozeboom, W. W., (1997). Good science is abductive, not hypothetico-deductive. In L. L.Harlow, S. A.Mulaik & J. H.Steiger (Eds.), What if there were no significance tests? (pp. 335-392). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
31. Schmidt, F. L., (1996). Statistical significance testing and cumulative knowledge in psychology: Implications for the training of researchers. Psychological Methods, 1, 115-129.
32. Schmidt, F. L., and Hunter, J. E., (1997). Eight common but false objections to the discontinuation of significance testing in the analysis of research data. In L. L.Harlow, S. A.Mulaik & J. H.Steiger (Eds.), What if there were no significance tests? (pp. 37-64). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
33. Selvin, H., (1957). A critique of tests of significance in survey research. American Sociological Review, 22, 519-527.
34. Snyder, P., and Lawson, S., (1993). Evaluating results using corrected and uncorrected effect size estimates. Journal of Experimental Education, 61, 334-349.
35. Suter, G. W. I., (1996). Abuse of hypothesis testing statistics in ecological risk assessment. Human Ecological Risk Assessment, 2, 331-347.
36. Thompson, B., (1990). Finding a correction for the sampling error in multivariate measures of relationship: A Monte Carlo study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 50, 15-31.
37. Thompson, B., (1996). AERA editorial policies regarding statistical significance testing: Three suggested reforms. Educational Researcher, 25(2), 26-30.
38. Thompson, B., (1998). Statistical significance and effect size reporting: Portrait of a possible future. Research in the Schools, 5(2), 33-38.
39. Thompson, B., (1999). If statistical significance tests are broken/misused, what practices should supplement or replace them? Theory & Psychology, 9, 167-183.
40. Thompson, B., (2001). Significance, effect sizes, stepwise methods, and other issues: Strong arguments move the field. Journal of Experimental Education, 70, 80-93.
41. Thompson, B., (2002a). “Statistical.,”“practical.,” and “clinical”: How many kinds of significance do counselors need to consider? Journal of Counseling & Development, 80, 64-71.
42. Thompson, B., (2002b). What future quantitative social science research could look like: Confidence intervals for effect sizes. Educational Researcher, 31(3), 24-31.
43. Thompson, B., (2004). The “significance” crisis in psychology and education. Journal of Socio-Economics, 33, 607-613.
44. Thompson, B., (2006). Foundations of behavioral statistics: An insight-based approach. New York: Guilford.
45. Thompson, B., (in press). Research synthesis: Effect sizes. In J.Green, G.Camilli & P. B.Elmore (Eds.), Complementary methods for research in education. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
46. Vacha-Haase, T., and Thompson, B., (2004). How to estimate and interpret various effect sizes. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 51, 473-481.
47. Wilkinson, L. & APA Task Force on Statistical Inference. (1999). Statistical methods in psychology journals: Guidelines and explanations. American Psychologist, 54, 594-604. (Reprint available from http:www.indiana.edueducy520readingswilkinson99.pdf).
48. Yoccuz, N. G., (1991). Use, overuse, and misuse of significance tests in evolutionary biology. Bulletin of the Ecology Society of America, 72, 106-111.
49. Ziliak, S. T., and McCloskey, D. N., (2004). Size matters: the standard error of regressions in the American Economic Review. Journal of Socio-Economics, 33, 527-546.