The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The median split: Robust, refined, and revived
Open accessAbstract
In this rebuttal, we discuss the comments of Rucker, McShane, and Preacher (2015) and McClelland, Lynch, Irwin, Spiller, and Fitzsimons (2015). Both commentaries raise interesting points, and although both teams clearly put a lot of work into their papers, the bottom line is this: our research sets the record straight that median splits are perfectly acceptable to use when independent variables are uncorrelated. The commentaries do a good job of furthering the discussion to help readers better develop their own preferences, which was the purpose of our paper. In the final analysis, neither of the commentaries pose any threat to our findings of the statistical robustness and valid use of median splits, and accordingly we can reassure researchers (and reviewers and journal editors) that they can be confident that when independent variables are uncorrelated, it is totally acceptable to conduct median split analyses.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.411 · Cited by 41,941
Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224378101800313 · Cited by 13,287
Kass, R. E., & Raftery, A. E. (1995) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1995.10476572 · Cited by 12,558
Reliability and Validity Assessment
Carmines, E., & Zeller, R. (1979) · doi:10.4135/9781412985642 · Cited by 5,884 · cited 2×
“It ignores a vast psychometric literature (Allen & Yen, 2001; Anastasi & Urbina, 1997; Carmines & Zeller, 1979; DeVellis, 2011; Kerlinger, 1999; Nunnally, 1978; Pedhazur, 1991), e.g., beginning with Classical Test Theory positing an observed data point as a function of a person's true score plus…”
BackgroundPoverty impedes cognitive function.
Mani, A., Mullainathan, S., Shafir, E., & Zhao, J. (2013) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1238041 · Cited by 2,967
Structural equations modeling: Fit Indices, sample size, and advanced topics
Iacobucci, D. (2010) · Journal of Consumer Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jcps.2009.09.003 · Cited by 2,263 · cited 1×
“…be reminded that regression is but one extremely simple form of a structural model that is subsumed into the fuller, richer structural equations modeling framework (Aaker & Bagozzi, 1979; Anderson & Gerbing, 1988; Fornell & Larcker, 1981; Iacobucci, 2009, 2010; Iacobucci, Saldanha, & Deng, 2007).”
BackgroundSelf-citationInteraction Effects in Multiple Regression
Jaccard, J., & Turrisi, R. (2003) · doi:10.4135/9781412984522 · Cited by 1,797
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1984) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.46.1.69 · Cited by 1,727 · cited 1×
“Although individuals sometimes are indeed persuaded by the peripheral cue of the number of arguments in a persuasive message (Petty & Cacioppo, 1984), we addressed each of McClelland's et al.'s objections to facilitate readers as they form their conclusions about this debate.”
BackgroundCohen, J. (1983) · Applied Psychological Measurement · doi:10.1177/014662168300700301 · Cited by 1,564 · cited 2×
“…coefficient involving a median split is on the order of 0.80 times the size of the correlation on the continuous form of the variable (per Cohen, 1983), so when McClelland et al. (2015) use the figure 0.64, they are either referring to r2 or an r in which median splits have been taken on…”
BackgroundInfluentialIacobucci, D., Saldanha, N., & Deng, X. (2007) · Journal of Consumer Psychology · doi:10.1016/s1057-7408(07)70020-7 · Cited by 1,362
Self-citation
Cited by
Planning and Conducting Experimental Advertising Research and Questionnaire Design
Geuens, M., & De Pelsmacker, P. (2017) · Journal of Advertising · doi:10.1080/00913367.2016.1225233 · Cited by 234
Bolsen, T., & Druckman, J. N. (2018) · Group Processes & Intergroup Relations · doi:10.1177/1368430217737855 · Cited by 228
Confirmation Bias and the Persistence of Misinformation on Climate Change
Zhou, Y., & Shen, L. (2022) · Communication Research · doi:10.1177/00936502211028049 · Cited by 155
Like or dislike? Adolescents’ responses to personalized social network site advertising
Walrave, M., Poels, K., Antheunis, M. L., Van den Broeck, E., & van Noort, G. (2018) · Journal of Marketing Communications · doi:10.1080/13527266.2016.1182938 · Cited by 112
Mikolasek, M., Witt, C. M., & Barth, J. (2018) · JMIR mHealth and uHealth · doi:10.2196/11271 · Cited by 83
Metadata
- Authors
- Iacobucci, D., Posavac, S. S., Kardes, F. R., Schneider, M. J., & Popovich, D. L.
- Venue
- Journal of Consumer Psychology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2015-07-03
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 690-704
- ISSN
- 1057-7408 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-7663
- OpenAlex
- W3124788457
- Cited by
- 475
- References
- 12
- FWCI
- 20.44
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The median split: Robust, refined, and revived. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jcps.2015.06.014
- The paper
- Iacobucci, D., Posavac, S. S., Kardes, F. R., Schneider, M. J., & Popovich, D. L. (2015). The median split: Robust, refined, and revived. Journal of Consumer Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2015.06.014
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
