title: Review of assumptions and problems in the appropriate conceptualization of effect size.
abstract: Estimation of the effect size parameter, D, the standardized difference between population means, is sensitive to heterogeneity of variance (heteroscedasticity), which seems to abound in psychological data. Pooling s2s assumes homoscedasticity, as do methods for constructing a confidence interval for D, estimating D from t or analysis of variance results, formulas that adjust estimates for inflation by main effects or covariates, and the Q statistic. The common language effect size statistic as an estimate of Pr(X1 > X2), the probability that a randomly sampled member of Population 1 will outscore a randomly sampled member of Population 2, also assumes normality and homoscedasticity. Various proposed solutions are reviewed, including measures that do not make these assumptions, such as the probability of superiority estimate of Pr(X1 > X2). Ways to reconceptualize effect size when treatments may affect moments such as the variance are also discussed.
authors: Department of Psychology, San Francisco State University, California, USA. rgrissom@sfsu.edu
authors: R J
authors: RJ
authors: Grissom
authors: J J
authors: JJ
authors: Kim
mesh_terms: D000704:Analysis of Variance; D006801:Humans; D010043:Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D011336:Probability; D011581:Psychological Tests / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D011594:Psychometrics; D015203:Reproducibility of Results