Cited by 2,232Psychometric Methodologies and TestingMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsReliability and Agreement in Measurement

At what sample size do correlations stabilize?

Schönbrodt, Felix D., Perugini, Marco·2013·Journal of Research in Personality

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jrp.2013.05.009

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

  • Study 1 sample size of approximately 250 was based on Monte Carlo simulations recommending that sample size for stable estimates of bivariate correlations.

    “Based on Monte Carlo simulations, Schönbrodt and Perugini [56] recommended using a sample approaching 250 for stable estimates of bivariate correlations.”
  • Study 1 aimed for a sample size equal to or greater than 250 participants to obtain stable initial estimates of the associations among trait nostalgia, moral concern, and punitiveness.

    “We aimed for a sample size equal to or greater than 250 participants, to obtain stable initial estimates of the associations among trait nostalgia, moral concern, and punitiveness78.”
  • Study 2 aimed for a minimum sample size of N = 250 to obtain stable estimates.

    “To obtain stable estimates, we exceeded this and aimed for a minimum sample size of N = 250, as in Study 178.”
  • The Moral Foundations Questionnaire scores reflect the degree to which participants prioritize moral concerns; higher scores indicate the importance one places on being a good versus bad person.

    “Taken together, these scores reflect the degree to which participants prioritize moral concerns; that is, higher scores indicate the importance one places on being a good (vs. bad) person.”
  • Excluding participants from countries represented by less than 300 participants ensured that the relations within each country were estimated with high precision.

    “Finally, we excluded participants who came from countries represented by less than 300 participants, ensuring that the relations within each country were estimated with high precision (Schönbrodt & Perugini, 2013).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Schönbrodt, F. D., & Perugini, M.
Affiliations
  • Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (DE)
  • University of Milan (IT)
Corresponding author
Schönbrodt, Felix D.
Venue
Journal of Research in Personality
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-10
Volume
47
Issue
5
Pages
609-612
ISSN
0092-6566 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2087160026
Cited by
2,232
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 187 · 2025: 259 · 2024: 261 · 2023: 268 · 2022: 272 · 2021: 278 · 2020: 219 · 2019: 161 · 2018: 121 · 2017: 92 · 2016: 52 · 2015: 41 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 1
FWCI
51.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Update notices
erratum (2018-06-01)
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Research in Personality (publishedVersion)
  • BOA (University of Milano-Bicocca) (submittedVersion)
  • Open access LMU (Ludwid Maxmilian's Universitat Munchen) (submittedVersion)
  • OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Reliability and Agreement in Measurement
Keywords
sample size, sample correlation, small sample bias, effect size, confidence intervals, Monte Carlo simulation

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