Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 215

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Unit of Analysis: Group Means versus Individual Observations

Hopkins, Kenneth D.·1982·American Educational Research Journal

Abstract

This paper shows that the common recommendation to use group means when there may be nonindependence among observational units is unnecessary, unduly restrictive, impoverishes the analysis, and limits the questions that can be addressed in a study. When random factors are properly identified and included in the analysis, the results (Fs and critical Fs) are identical in balanced ANOVA designs, irrespective of whether group means or individual observations are employed. The use of individual observations also allows the exploration of other interesting questions pertaining to interaction and generalizability. In addition, the pooling strategy can be considered. Thus, the question of the proper experimental unit or unit of analysis for treatment effects is answered directly, correctly, and implicitly when the proper statistical model is employed.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/1162366

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 215

Metadata

Authors
Hopkins, K. D.
Venue
American Educational Research Journal
Published
1982
Volume
19
Issue
1
Pages
5
ISSN
0002-8312 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2015981771
Cited by
215
References
2
FWCI
11.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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 Unit of Analysis: Group Means versus Individual Observations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/1162366
The paper
Hopkins, K. D. (1982). The Unit of Analysis: Group Means versus Individual Observations. American Educational Research Journal. https://doi.org/10.2307/1162366

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.