The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Understanding Power and Rules of Thumb for Determining Sample Sizes
Open accessAbstract
This article addresses the definition of power and its relationship to Type I and Type II errors.We discuss the relationship of sample size and power.Finally, we offer statistical rules of thumb guiding the selection of sample sizes large enough for sufficient power to detecting differences, associations, chi-square, and factor analyses.As researchers, it is disheartening to pour time and intellectual energy into a research project, analyze the data, and find that the elusive .05significance level was not met.If the null hypothesis is genuinely true, then the findings are robust.But, what if the null hypothesis is false and the results failed to detect the difference at a high enough level?It is a missed opportunity.Power refers to the probability of rejecting a false null hypothesis.Attending to power during the design phase protect both researchers and respondents.In recent years, some Institutional Review Boards for the protection of human respondents have rejected or altered protocols due to design concerns (Resnick, 2006).They argue that an "underpowered" study may not yield useful results and consequently unnecessarily put respondents at risk.Overall, researchers can and should attend to power.This article defines power in accessible ways, provides guidelines for increasing power, and finally offers "rules-of-thumb" for numbers of respondents needed for common statistical procedures.
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
How many subjects does it take to do a regression analysis
Green, S. B. (1991) · Multivariate Behavioral Research · doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr2603_7 · Cited by 3,916 · cited 1×
“Green (1991) provides a comprehensive overview of the procedures used to determine regression sample sizes.”
MethodRelation of sample size to the stability of component patterns.
Guadagnoli, E., & Velicer, W. F. (1988) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.103.2.265 · Cited by 2,880
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
Things I have learned (so far).
Cohen, J. (1990) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.45.12.1304 · Cited by 1,781
Cited by
Why are some STEM fields more gender balanced than others?
Cheryan, S., Ziegler, S. A., Montoya, A. K., & Jiang, L. (2017) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/bul0000052 · Cited by 1,259
Schmiedel, T., Müller, O., & vom Brocke, J. (2019) · Organizational Research Methods · doi:10.1177/1094428118773858 · Cited by 319
QR code and mobile payment: The disruptive forces in retail
Yan, L.-Y., Tan, G. W.-H., Loh, X.-M., Hew, J.-J., & Ooi, K.-B. (2021) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102300 · Cited by 252
Bőthe, B., Potenza, M. N., Griffiths, M. D., Kraus, S. W., Klein, V., Fuss, J., & Demetrovics, Z. (2020) · Journal of Behavioral Addictions · doi:10.1556/2006.2020.00034 · Cited by 175
Exploring the effects of project-based learning in secondary mathematics education
Holmes, V.-L., & Hwang, Y. (2016) · The Journal of Educational Research · doi:10.1080/00220671.2014.979911 · Cited by 172
Metadata
- Authors
- Wilson Van Voorhis, C. R., & Morgan, B. L.
- Venue
- Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology
- Published
- 2007-09-01
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 43-50
- ISSN
- 1913-4126 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W112288907
- Cited by
- 1,939
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 2.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
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: Understanding Power and Rules of Thumb for Determining Sample Sizes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.20982/tqmp.03.2.p043
- The paper
- Wilson Van Voorhis, C. R., & Morgan, B. L. (2007). Understanding Power and Rules of Thumb for Determining Sample Sizes. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology. https://doi.org/10.20982/tqmp.03.2.p043
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.