Colloquium on Effect Sizes: The Roles of Editors, Textbook Authors, and the Publication Manual: Reporting of Statistical Inference in the Journal of Applied Psychology: Little Evidence of Reform

Educational and Psychological Measurement

Volumn 61, Issue 2, 2001, Pages 181-210

  Finch, Sue ^a   Cumming, Geoff ^a   Thomason, Neil ^b  

^a LA TROBE UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84993683954     PISSN: 00131644     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0013164401612001     Document Type: Article

References (67)

1. American Psychological Association. (1957). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association. Washington, DC: Author.
2. American Psychological Association. (1967). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association. Washington, DC: Author.
3. American Psychological Association. (1974). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
4. American Psychological Association. (1983). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
5. American Psychological Association. (1994). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
6. American Psychological Association Council of Editors. (1952). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association. Psychological Bulletin, 49, 389-450.
7. Bakan, D. (1967). On method. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
8. 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.
9. Bobko, P. (1995). Editorial. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 3-5.
10. Boring, E. G. (1919). Mathematical versus statistical significance. Psychological Bulletin, 16, 335-338.
11. Campbell, J. P. (1982). Editorial: Some remarks from the outgoing editor. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 691-700.
12. Carver, R. (1993). The case against statistical significance testing, revisited. Journal of Experimental Education, 61, 287-292.
13. Chandler, R. E. (1957) The statistical concepts of confidence and significance. Psychological Bulletin, 54(5), 429-430.
14. Chase, L. J., & Chase, R. B. (1976). A statistical power analysis of applied psychological research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 61, 234-237.
15. Cohen, J. (1962). The statistical power of abnormal-social psychological research: A review. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 65, 145-153.
16. Cohen, J. (1965). Some statistical issues in psychological research. In B. Wolman (Ed.), Handbook of clinical psychology (pp. 95-121). New York: McGraw-Hill.
17. Cohen, J. (1990). Things I have learned (so far). American Psychologist, 45, 1304-1312.
18. Cohen, J. (1994). The earth is round (p < 0.05). American Psychologist, 49, 997-1003.
19. Falk, R., & Greenbaum, C. W. (1995). Significance tests die hard: The amazing persistence of a probabilistic misconception. Theory & Psychology, 5, 75-98.
20. Finch, S., Thomason, N., & Cumming, G. (2001). Past and future APA guidelines for statistical practice. Manuscript in preparation.
21. Gigerenzer, G. (1993). The superego, the ego and the id in statistical reasoning. In G. Keren & C. Lewis (Eds.), A handbook for data analysis in the behavioural sciences: Methodological issues (pp. 311-339). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
22. Gigerenzer, G., & Murray, D. (1987). Cognition as intuitive statistics. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
23. Grayson, D., Pattison, P., & Robins, G. (1997). Evidence, inference and the “rejection” of the significance test. Australian Journal of Psychology, 49(2), 64-70.
24. Guion, R. M. (1983). Editorial: Comments from the new editor. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 547-551.
25. Hammond, G. (1996). The objections to the null hypothesis as a means of analysing psychological data. Journal of Australian Psychology, 48, 104-106.
26. Harlow, L., Mulaik, S., & Steiger, J. (1997). What if there were no significance tests? Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
27. Heldref Foundation. (1997). Guidelines for contributors. Journal of Experimental Education, 65, 95-96.
28. Hubbard, R., Parsa, R. A., & Luthy, M. R. (1997). The spread of statistical significance testing in psychology: The case of the Journal of Applied Psychology 1917-1994. Theory & Psychology, 7, 545-554.
29. Hubbard, R., & Ryan, P. A. (2000). The historical growth of statistical significance testing in psychology—And its future prospects. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60, 661-681.
30. Huberty, C. J., & Pike, C. J. (1999). On some history regarding statistical testing. In B. Thompson (Ed.), Advances in social science methodology (Vol. 5, pp. 1-22). Stamford, CT: JAI.
31. Hunter, J., & Schmidt, F. (1990). Methods of meta-analysis. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
32. Hunter, J. E. (1997). Needed: A ban on the significance test. Psychological Science, 8, 3-7.
33. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. (1997). Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals. Journal of the American Medical Association, 277, 927-934.
34. John, I. D. (1992). Statistics as rhetoric in psychology. Australian Psychologist, 27, 144-149.
35. Kirk, R. (1996). Practical significance: A concept whose time has come. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56, 746-759.
36. Loftus, G. R. (1993). A picture is worth a thousand p-values: On the irrelevance of hypothesis testing in the microcomputer age. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 25, 250-256.
37. Loftus, G. R. (1996). Why psychology will never be a real science until we change the way we analyze data. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 5(6), 161-171.
38. Lykken, D. T. (1968). Statistical significance in psychological research. Psychological Bulletin, 70, 151-159.
39. Meehl, P. E. (1978). Theoretical risks and tabular asterisks: Sir Karl, Sir Ronald, and the slow progress of soft psychology. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 4, 806-843.
40. Mittag, K. C., & Thompson, B. (2000). A national survey of AERA members' perceptions of statistical significance tests and other statistical issues. Educational Researcher, 29(4), 14-20.
41. Muchinsky, P. M. (1979). Some changes in the characteristics of articles published in the Journal of Applied Psychology over the past 20 years. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64, 455-459.
42. Murphy, K. R. (1997). Editorial. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 3-5.
43. Nelson, N., Rosenthal, R., & Rosnow, R. L. (1986). Interpretation of significance levels and effect sizes by psychological researchers. American Psychologist, 41, 1299-1301.
44. Oakes, M. (1986). Statistical inference: A commentary for the social and behavioural sciences. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
45. Pollard, P. (1993). How significant is “significance”? In G. Keren & C. Lewis (Eds.), A handbook for data analysis in the behavioural sciences: Methodological issues (pp. 449-460). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
46. Pollard, P., & Richardson, J. (1987). On the probability of making Type I errors. Psychological Bulletin, 102, 159-163.
47. Reichardt, C. S., & Gollob, H. F. (1997). When confidence intervals should be used instead of statistical tests, and vice versa. In L. Harlow, S. Muliak, & J. Steiger (Eds.), What if there were no significance tests? (pp. 259-284). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
48. Rosenthal, R., & Gaito, J. (1963). The interpretation of level of significance by psychological researchers. Journal of Psychology, 55, 33-38.
49. Rosnow, R. L., & Rosenthal, R. (1989). Statistical procedures and the justification of knowledge in psychological science. American Psychologist, 44, 1276-1284.
50. Rossi, J. S. (1997). A case study in the failure of psychology as a cumulative science: The spontaneous recovery of verbal learning. In L. Harlow, S. Muliak, & J. Steiger (Eds.), What if there were no significance tests? (pp. 175-197). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
51. Schmidt, F. L. (1992). What do data really mean? Research findings, meta-analysis and cumulative knowledge in psychology. American Psychologist, 47, 1173-1181.
52. Schmidt, F. L. (1996). Statistical significance testing and cumulative knowledge in psychology: Implications for training of researchers. Psychological Methods, 1, 115-129.
53. Schmitt, N. (1989). Editorial. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 843-845.
54. Sedlmeier, P., & Gigerenzer, G. (1989). Do studies of statistical power have an effect on the power of studies? Psychological Bulletin, 105, 309-315.
55. Shrout, P. (1997). Should significance tests be banned? Introduction to a special section exploring the pros and cons. Psychological Science, 8, 1-2.
56. Thompson, B. (1993). Foreword. Journal of Experimental Education, 61(4), 285-286.
57. Thompson, B. (1994). Guidelines for authors. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54, 837-847.
58. Thompson, B. (1996). AERA editorial policies regarding statistical significance testing: Three suggested reforms. Educational Researcher, 25(2), 26-30.
59. Thompson, B., & Snyder, P. A. (1997). Statistical significance testing practices in The Journal of Experimental Education. Journal of Experimental Education, 66, 75-83.
60. Thompson, B., & Snyder, P. A. (1998). Statistical significance and reliability analyses in recent Journal of Counseling & Development research articles. Journal of Counseling & Development, 76, 436-441.
61. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1971). Belief in the law of small numbers. Psychological Bulletin, 76, 105-110.
62. Tyron, W. W. (1998). The inscrutable null hypothesis. American Psychologist, 53, 796-796.
63. Vacha-Haase, T., & Ness, C. N. (1999). Statistical significance testing as it relates to practice: Use within Professional Psychology: Research and Practice. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 30(1), 104-105.
64. Vacha-Haase, T., & Nilsson, J. E. (1998). Statistical significance reporting: Current trends and uses in MECD. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 31, 46-57.
65. Vacha-Haase, T., Nilsson, J. E., Reetz, D. R., Lance, T. S., & Thompson, B. (2000). Reporting practices and APA editorial policies regarding statistical significance and effect size. Theory & Psychology, 10, 413-425.
66. Wilkinson, L., & Task Force on Statistical Inference. (1999). Statistical methods in psychology journals: Guidelines and explanations. American Psychologist, 54, 594-604.
67. Zuckerman, M., Hodgins, H. S., Zuckerman, A., & Rosenthal, R. (1993). Contemporary issues in the analysis of data: A survey of 551 psychologists. Psychological Science, 4, 49-53.