The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Interpreting effect sizes when controlling for stability effects in longitudinal autoregressive models: Implications for psychological science
Abstract
Effect sizes in longitudinal studies often are dramatically smaller than effect sizes in cross-sectional studies. Indeed, autoregressive models (which are often used in longitudinal studies but not in cross-sectional studies) control for past levels on the outcome (i.e., stability effects) in order to predict change in levels of the outcome over time and thus may greatly reduce the magnitude of the effect of a predictor on the outcome. Unfortunately, however, there have been no attempts to differentiate guidelines for interpreting effect sizes for longitudinal studies versus cross-sectional studies. Consequently, longitudinal effect sizes that fall below the universal guidelines for “small” may be incorrectly dismissed as trivial, when they might be meaningful. In the current paper, we first review the present guidelines for interpreting effect sizes. Next, we discuss several examples of how controlling for stability effects can dramatically attenuate effect sizes of other predictors, in order to support our argument that the current guidelines may be misleading for interpreting longitudinal effects. Finally, we conclude by making recommendations for researchers regarding the interpretation of effect sizes in longitudinal autoregressive models.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“High temporal stabilities make it more difficult to detect an effect that actually exists [76].”
From Procrastination, depression and anxiety symptoms in university students: a three-wave longitudinal study on the mediating role of perceived stress (2024) · cites this paper as [76]
In the citing paper
“It accounted for the stability across timepoints and pre‐existing relationships between variables, thereby assessing the prediction of incremental changes in variables over time (Adachi & Willoughby, 2015).”
From A cross‐lagged twin study of emotional symptoms, social isolation and peer victimisation from early adolescence to emerging adulthood (2023) · cites this paper as Adachi & Willoughby, 2015
Citations
Cites
Cohen, J. (1992) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037//0033-2909.112.1.155 · Cited by 8,771
Ouellette, J. A., & Wood, W. (1998) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.124.1.54 · Cited by 3,480
An effect size primer: A guide for clinicians and researchers.
Ferguson, C. J. (2009) · Professional Psychology: Research and Practice · doi:10.1037/a0015808 · Cited by 3,467
Statistical methods in psychology journals: Guidelines and explanations.
Wilkinson, L., & Task Force on Statistical Inference (1999) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.54.8.594 · Cited by 2,791
Stability of aggressive reaction patterns in males: A review.
Olweus, D. (1979) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.86.4.852 · Cited by 1,392
Some Practical Guidelines for Effective Sample Size Determination
Lenth, R. (2001) · The American Statistician · doi:10.1198/000313001317098149 · Cited by 1,200
A variance explanation paradox: When a little is a lot.
Abelson, R. P. (1985) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.97.1.129 · Cited by 1,045
Lifelines and risks: pathways of youth in our time
(1995) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.33-2432 · Cited by 992
Aggression and Antisocial Behavior in Youth
Dodge, K. A., Coie, J. D., & Lynam, D. R. (2007) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9780470147658.chpsy0312 · Cited by 686
Standardized or simple effect size: what should be reported?
Baguley, T. (2009) · British Journal of Psychology · doi:10.1348/000712608x377117 · Cited by 619
Ferguson, C. J. (2015) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691615592234 · Cited by 524
(2012) · TigerPrints (Clemson University) · Cited by 402
A Note on Percent Variance Explained as A Measure of the Importance of Effects
Rosenthal, R., & Rubin, D. B. (1979) · Journal of Applied Social Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1979.tb02713.x · Cited by 238
Cui, M., Donnellan, M. B., & Conger, R. D. (2007) · Developmental Psychology · doi:10.1037/0012-1649.43.6.1544 · Cited by 196
Willoughby, T., Adachi, P. J. C., & Good, M. (2011) · Developmental Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0026046 · Cited by 178
Self-citationVaillancourt, T., Brendgen, M. R., Boivin, M., & Tremblay, R. E. (2003) · Child Development · doi:10.1046/j.1467-8624.2003.00628.x · Cited by 172
The “Quick Start Guide” for Conducting and Publishing Longitudinal Research
Ployhart, R. E., & Ward, A. K. (2011) · Journal of Business and Psychology · doi:10.1007/s10869-011-9209-6 · Cited by 150
Understanding statistical power in the context of applied research
Baguley, T. S. (2004) · Applied Ergonomics · doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2004.01.002 · Cited by 148
Caprara, G. V., Tisak, M. S., Alessandri, G., Fontaine, R. G., Fida, R., & Paciello, M. (2013) · Developmental Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0034488 · Cited by 141
Academic personal bests (PBs), engagement, and achievement: A cross-lagged panel analysis
Martin, A. J., & Liem, G. A. D. (2010) · Learning and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2010.01.001 · Cited by 134
Lee, S. J., Altschul, I., & Gershoff, E. T. (2013) · Developmental Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0031630 · Cited by 110
Adachi, P. J. C., & Willoughby, T. (2013) · Journal of Youth and Adolescence · doi:10.1007/s10964-013-9952-2 · Cited by 80
Self-citationThorndike, R. L. (1940) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0061268 · Cited by 54
The Impact of APA and AERA Guidelines on effect size reporting
Peng, C.-Y. J., Chen, L.-T., Chiang, H.-M., & Chiang, Y.-C. (2013) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-013-9218-2 · Cited by 46
Self-Esteem Stability and Responses to the Stability of Self Scale
Marsh, H. W. (1993) · Journal of Research in Personality · doi:10.1006/jrpe.1993.1018 · Cited by 30
Lee, J. A. (2011) · Asian Journal Of Social Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1467-839x.2011.01345.x · Cited by 7
Issues in Discrete-time Panel Analysis
Taris, T. W. (2000) · SAGE Publications Ltd eBooks · doi:10.4135/9781849208512.n4 · Cited by 4
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- 10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1979.tb02713 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Pinquart, M. (2017) · Developmental psychology · doi:10.1037/dev0000295 · Cited by 1,339
The job demands-resources model: A meta-analytic review of longitudinal studies
Lesener, T., Gusy, B., & Wolter, C. (2018) · Work & Stress · doi:10.1080/02678373.2018.1529065 · Cited by 1,116
Effect size guidelines for cross-lagged effects.
Orth, U., Meier, L. L., Bühler, J. L., Dapp, L. C., Krauss, S., Messerli, D., & Robins, R. W. (2022) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/met0000499 · Cited by 780
Pinquart, M. (2016) · Marriage & Family Review · doi:10.1080/01494929.2016.1247761 · Cited by 551
The link between self-esteem and social relationships: A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies.
Harris, M. A., & Orth, U. (2020) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/pspp0000265 · Cited by 575
Metadata
- Authors
- Adachi, P., & Willoughby, T.
- Affiliations
- Brock University (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Adachi, Paul
- ORCID
- Willoughby, Teena
- Venue
- European Journal of Developmental Psychology
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2014-09-26
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 116-128
- ISSN
- 1740-5610 (ISSN-L)
- 1740-5629
- OpenAlex
- W2041605892
- Cited by
- 448
- References
- 28
- Citations by year
- 2026: 41 · 2025: 41 · 2024: 42 · 2023: 47 · 2022: 63 · 2021: 65 · 2020: 36 · 2019: 36 · 2018: 25 · 2017: 25 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 1
- FWCI
- 18.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- European Journal of Developmental Psychology (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Keywords
- effect size interpretation, measurement stability
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
