Multiple trials may yield exaggerated effect size estimates

Journal of General Psychology

Volumn 138, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 1-11

  Brand, Andrew ^a   Bradley, Michael T ^b   Best, Lisa A ^b   Stoica, George ^b  

^a Kings College   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEW BRUNSWICK   (Canada)

Author keywords

effect size; multiple items; regression correlational designs; repeated measures

Indexed keywords

EID: 78650906706     PISSN: 00221309     EISSN: 19400888     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00221309.2010.520360     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Baguley, T. (2009). Standardized or simple effect size: What should be reported? British Journal of Psychology, 100, 603-617.
2. Beck,A. T., Ward, C.,&Mendelson,M.(1961). Beck Depression Inventory (BDI).Archives of General Psychiatry, 4, 561-571.
3. Bond, C. F., Jr., Wiitala, W. L., & Richard, F. D. (2003). Meta-analysis of raw mean differences. Psychological Methods, 8, 406-418.
4. Bradley, D. R., & Russell, R. L. (1998). Some cautions regarding statistical power in split-plot designs. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 30, 462-477.
5. Brand, A., Bradley, M. T., Best, L. A., & Stoica, G. (2008). Accuracy of effect size estimates from published psychological research. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 106, 645-649.
6. Cohen,J. (1962). The statistical power of abnormal-social psychological research: A review. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 69, 145-153.
7. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
8. Eysenck, H. J., & Eysenck, S. B. G. (1975). Manual of the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire. London: Hodder and Stoughton.
9. Frison, L. and Pocock, S. J. (1992). Repeated measures in clinical trials: analysis using mean summary statistics and its implication for design. Statistics in Medicine, 11, 1685-1704.
10. Gliner, J. A., Leech, N. L., and Morgan, G. A. (2002). Problems with null hypothesis significance testing (NHST): What do the textbooks say? The Journal of Experimental Education, 71(1), 83-92.
11. Hubbard, R., & Lindsey, R. M. (2008). Why p values are not a useful measure of evidence in statistical significance testing. Theory & Psychology 18, 69-88.
12. Kraemer, H. C., Gradner, C., Brooks, J. O., & Yesavage, J. A. (1998). Advantages of excluding underpowered studies in meta-analysis: Inclusionist versus exclusionist viewpoints. Psychological Methods, 3, 23-31.
13. Muncer, S. J., Craigie, M., & Holmes, J. (2003). Meta-analysis and power: Some suggestions for the use of power in research synthesis. Understanding Statistics, 2, 1-12.
14. Overall, J. E. (1996). How many repeated measurements are useful? Journal of Clinical Psychology, 52, 243-252.
15. Rossi, J. S. (1990). Statistical power of psychological research: What have we gained in 20 years? Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 58, 646-656.
16. Sedlmeier, P., & Gigerenzer, G. (1989). Do studies of statistical power have an effect on the power of studies? Psychological Bulletin, 105, 309-316.
17. Trafimow, D. (2003). Hypothesis testing and theory evaluation at the boundaries: Surprising insights from Bayes's theorem. Psychological Review, 110, 526-535.
18. Trafimow, D., & Rice, S. (2009). What if social scientists had reviewed great works of the past? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4, 65-78.
19. Vickers, A. J. (2003). How many repeated measures in repeated measures designs? Statistical issues for comparative trials. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 3, 22-31.
20. Wilkinson, L. (1999). Task Force on Statistical Inference. Statistical methods in psychology journals: Guidelines and explanations. American Psychologist, 54(8), 594-604.