articleBritish Journal of PsychologyNov 17, 2008Closed access

Standardized or simple effect size: What should be reported?

Nottingham Trent University

PubMed
Indexed incrossrefpubmed

Abstract

It is regarded as best practice for psychologists to report effect size when disseminating quantitative research findings. Reporting of effect size in the psychological literature is patchy - though this may be changing - and when reported it is far from clear that appropriate effect size statistics are employed. This paper considers the practice of reporting point estimates of standardized effect size and explores factors such as reliability, range restriction and differences in design that distort standardized effect size unless suitable corrections are employed. For most purposes simple (unstandardized) effect size is more robust and versatile than standardized effect size. Guidelines for deciding what…

Citation impact

625
total citations
FWCI
7.86
Percentile
100%
References
49
Citations per year

Authors

1

Topics & keywords

Keywords
  • Psychology
  • Statistic
  • Sample size determination
  • Context (archaeology)
  • Statistics
  • Strictly standardized mean difference
  • Preference
  • Simple (philosophy)
No related works found for this paper.