Cited by 2,457Statistical Methods and Bayesian InferencePsychology Research and BibliometricsMeta-analysis and systematic reviews

Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences

·1977·Elsevier eBooks

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/c2013-0-10517-x

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Based on Cohen's (1988) guidelines for interpreting effect sizes (Hedges' g), an effect size smaller than 0.2 is considered negligible, 0.2-0.5 is small, 0.5-0.8 is moderate, and greater than 0.8 is large.

    “Based on Cohen's (1988) guidelines for interpreting effect sizes (Hedges'g), an effect size smaller than 0.2 is considered negligible, 0.2-0.5 is small, 0.5-0.8 is moderate, and greater than 0.8 is large.”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Venue
Elsevier eBooks
Publisher
Elsevier
Published
1977
OpenAlex
W4300869678
Cited by
2,457
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 21 · 2025: 57 · 2024: 78 · 2023: 100 · 2022: 102 · 2021: 101 · 2020: 132 · 2019: 107 · 2018: 116 · 2017: 87 · 2016: 66 · 2015: 76 · 2014: 53 · 2013: 55 · 2012: 59
FWCI
10.41
Type
book
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Elsevier eBooks (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Psychology Research and Bibliometrics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
Keywords
statistical power analysis, statistical power, sample size determination, effect size, hypothesis testing, behavioral science

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review