Researchers are strongly encouraged to accompany the results of statistical tests with appropriate estimates of effect size. For 2-group comparisons, a probability-based effect size estimator ("A") has many appealing properties (e.g., it is easy to understand, robust to violations of parametric assumptions, insensitive to outliers). We review…

It is good scientific practice to the report an appropriate estimate of effect size and a confidence interval (CI) to indicate the precision with which a population effect was estimated. For comparisons of 2 independent groups, a probability-based effect size estimator (A) that is equal to the area under a receiver operating characteristic curve…

Previous studies of different methods of testing mediation models have consistently found two anomalous results. The first result is elevated Type I error rates for the bias-corrected and accelerated bias-corrected bootstrap tests not found in nonresampling tests or in resampling tests that did not include a bias correction. This is of special…

This article uses meta-analyses published in "Psychological Bulletin" from 1995 to 2005 to describe meta-analyses in psychology, including examination of statistical power, Type I errors resulting from multiple comparisons, and model choice. Retrospective power estimates indicated that univariate categorical and continuous moderators, individual…

When two or more univariate population means are compared, the proportion of variation in the dependent variable accounted for by population group membership is eta-squared. This effect size can be generalized by using multivariate measures of association, based on the multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) statistics, to establish whether…

This article is a methodological-substantive synergy. Methodologically, we demonstrate latent-variable contextual models that integrate structural equation models (with multiple indicators) and multilevel models. These models simultaneously control for and unconfound measurement error due to sampling of items at the individual (L1) and group (L2)…

An evaluation of the rules-of-thumb used to determine the minimum number of subjects required to conduct multiple regression analyses suggests that researchers who use a rule of thumb rather than power analyses trade simplicity of use for accuracy and specificity of response. Insufficient power is likely to result. (SLD)