The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Synthesizing standardized mean‐change measures
Abstract
A new approach is presented for the meta‐analysis of data from pre‐test‐post‐test designs. With this approach, data from studies using different designs may be compared directly and studies without control groups need not be omitted. The approach is based on a ‘standardized mean‐change’ measure, computed for each sample within a study, and involves analysis of the standardized mean changes and differences in the standardized mean changes. Analyses are illustrated using results of studies of the effectiveness of mental practice on motor‐skill development.
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
“The estimation of treatment effects on the dependent variables, for each study, was based on the calculation of the standardized mean change using raw score standardization (SMCR; see Appendix A), taking the standard deviations of the pretest [33,34].”
From Mindfulness-Based Interventions for People with Schizophrenia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (2020) · cites this paper as [33]
In the citing paper
“Based on the premise for comparing ES previously utilized [58-60], for each of the measures of interest based on the therapeutic intervention (Figure 1).”
Citations
Cites
Still being checked.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Dickerson, S. S., & Kemeny, M. E. (2004) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.130.3.355 · Cited by 5,881
Effect size, confidence interval and statistical significance: a practical guide for biologists
Nakagawa, S., & Cuthill, I. C. (2007) · Biological Reviews · doi:10.1111/j.1469-185x.2007.00027.x · Cited by 3,835
Morris, S. B., & DeShon, R. P. (2002) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.7.1.105 · Cited by 2,502
Estimating effect sizes from pretest-posttest-control group designs
Morris, S. B. (2008) · Organizational Research Methods · doi:10.1177/1094428106291059 · Cited by 2,133
Distributed practice in verbal recall tasks: A review and quantitative synthesis.
Cepeda, N. J., Pashler, H., Vul, E., Wixted, J. T., & Rohrer, D. (2006) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.132.3.354 · Cited by 1,888
Metadata
- Authors
- Becker, B. J.
- Affiliations
- Michigan State University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Becker, Betsy Jane
- ORCID
- Becker, Betsy Jane
- Venue
- British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1988-11
- Volume
- 41
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 257-278
- ISSN
- 0007-1102 (ISSN-L)
- 2044-8317
- OpenAlex
- W2055583849
- Semantic Scholar
- e1221bfead50662557b5f530446d766d7a9999ef
- Cited by
- 889
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 60 · 2025: 55 · 2024: 55 · 2023: 41 · 2022: 50 · 2021: 58 · 2020: 54 · 2019: 50 · 2018: 46 · 2017: 35 · 2016: 38 · 2015: 43 · 2014: 34 · 2013: 34 · 2012: 29
- FWCI
- 0.62
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Academy of Education
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Psychology Research and Bibliometrics
- Keywords
- standardized mean change, pre-post test design, meta-analysis, standardized mean difference, mental practice, motor skill development
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
