.png){kind=icon}
返回
Impossible Hypotheses and Effect-Size Limits
.png){kind=icon}
OA
AI
DOI：10.1177/25152459231197605.png)
.png){kind=icon}
原文求助.png){kind=icon}
分享.png){kind=icon}
收藏
摘要
En 中文
Psychological science is moving toward further specification of effect sizes when formulating hypotheses, performing power analyses, and considering the relevance of findings. This development has sparked an appreciation for the wider context in which such effect sizes are found because the importance assigned to specific sizes may vary from situation to situation. We add to this development a crucial but in psychology hitherto underappreciated contingency: There are mathematical limits to the magnitudes that population effect sizes can take within the common multivariate context in which psychology is situated, and these limits can be far more restrictive than typically assumed. The implication is that some hypothesized or preregistered effect sizes may be impossible. At the same time, these restrictions offer a way of statistically triangulating the plausible range of unknown effect sizes. We explain the reason for the existence of these limits, illustrate how to identify them, and offer recommendations and tools for improving hypothesized effect sizes by exploiting the broader multivariate context in which they occur.
Keyword:
hypothesis
multivariate statistics
effect size
correlation
sampling
期刊
A
IF:
13.4
论文数:
319
被引数:
3.7K
机构
引用论文
.png){kind=icon}
Implications of direct and indirect range restriction for meta-analysis methods and findings直接和间接范围限制对荟萃分析方法和结果的影响
PREAI
分享收藏分享收藏Evaluating effect size in psychological research: Sense and nonsense (vol 2, pg 156, 2019)评估心理研究中的效应大小: 意义和废话 (第2卷，156页，2019)
OAAI
OAAI分享收藏
查看更多内容