Brand Andrew, Bradley Michael T
NWORTH Bangor Clinical Trials Unit, Institute of Medical & Social Care Research, Bangor University, UK.
University of New Brunswick, Canada.
Psychol Rep. 2016 Feb;118(1):154-170. doi: 10.1177/0033294115625265.
Confidence interval ( CI) widths were calculated for reported Cohen's d standardized effect sizes and examined in two automated surveys of published psychological literature. The first survey reviewed 1,902 articles from Psychological Science. The second survey reviewed a total of 5,169 articles from across the following four APA journals: Journal of Abnormal Psychology, Journal of Applied Psychology, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, and Developmental Psychology. The median CI width for d was greater than 1 in both surveys. Hence, CI widths were, as Cohen (1994) speculated, embarrassingly large. Additional exploratory analyses revealed that CI widths varied across psychological research areas and that CI widths were not discernably decreasing over time. The theoretical implications of these findings are discussed along with ways of reducing the CI widths and thus improving precision of effect size estimation.
针对报告的科恩d标准化效应量计算了置信区间(CI)宽度,并在两项已发表心理学文献的自动调查中进行了检验。第一项调查回顾了《心理科学》中的1902篇文章。第二项调查总共回顾了美国心理学会(APA)下属以下四本期刊中的5169篇文章:《变态心理学杂志》《应用心理学杂志》《实验心理学杂志:人类感知与表现》以及《发展心理学》。在两项调查中,d的CI宽度中位数均大于1。因此,正如科恩(1994年)所推测的那样,CI宽度大得惊人。进一步的探索性分析表明,CI宽度在不同的心理学研究领域有所不同,并且CI宽度并没有随着时间的推移而明显减小。本文讨论了这些发现的理论意义以及减小CI宽度从而提高效应量估计精度的方法。