articlePLoS BiologyMar 2, 2017GOLD OA

Empirical assessment of published effect sizes and power in the recent cognitive neuroscience and psychology literature

University of Cambridge · Protein Metrics (United States) · +1 more institution

PubMed
Indexed incrossrefdoajpubmed

Abstract

We have empirically assessed the distribution of published effect sizes and estimated power by analyzing 26,841 statistical records from 3,801 cognitive neuroscience and psychology papers published recently. The reported median effect size was D = 0.93 (interquartile range: 0.64-1.46) for nominally statistically significant results and D = 0.24 (0.11-0.42) for nonsignificant results. Median power to detect small, medium, and large effects was 0.12, 0.44, and 0.73, reflecting no improvement through the past half-century. This is so because sample sizes have remained small. Assuming similar true effect sizes in both disciplines, power was lower in cognitive neuroscience than in psychology. Journal impact factors…

Citation impact

763
total citations
FWCI
78.51
Percentile
100%
References
60
Citations per year

Authors

2

Topics & keywords

Keywords
  • Replication (statistics)
  • Sample size determination
  • Cognition
  • Statistical power
  • Cognitive neuroscience
  • Range (aeronautics)
  • Experimental psychology
  • Cognitive psychology
UN Sustainable Development Goals
  • Quality Education
No related works found for this paper.

Funding