Power Analysis and Effect Size in Mixed Effects Models: A Tutorial
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
In psychology, attempts to replicate published findings are less successful than expected. For properly powered studies replication rate should be around 80%, whereas in practice less than 40% of the studies selected from different areas of psychology can be replicated. Researchers in cognitive psychology are hindered in estimating the power of their studies, because the designs they use present a sample of stimulus materials to a sample of participants, a situation not covered by most power formulas. To remedy the situation, we review the literature related to the topic and introduce recent software packages, which we apply to the data of two masked priming studies with high power. We checked how we could estimate the power of each study and how much they could be reduced to remain powerful enough. On the basis of this analysis, we recommend that a properly powered reaction time experiment with repeated measures has at least 1,600 word observations per condition (e.g., 40 participants, 40 stimuli). This is considerably more than current practice. We also show that researchers must include the number of observations in meta-analyses because the effect sizes currently reported depend on the number of stimuli presented to the participants. Our analyses can easily be applied to new datasets gathered.
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
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.
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?
Aggregations provide independent observations for non-parametric testing and make it appropriate when dealing with small sample sizes and repeated measures.
“Aggregations provide independent observations for non-parametric testing and make it appropriate when dealing with small sample sizes and repeated measures [8].”
From How University Disability Services Professionals Write Image Descriptions for HCI Figures Using Generative AI (2026) · cites this paper as [8]
The ‘Traditional F1 and F2 analysis’ section describes averaging repeated observations for each participant before analysis, which supports the aggregation part of the claim. It enters those averages into repeated-measures ANOVA or a paired t-test, not a non-parametric test. The paper does not say that aggregation makes non-parametric testing appropriate for small samples or establishes independent observations. (LLM, conf=0.85)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using <b>lme4</b>
Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015) · Journal of Statistical Software · doi:10.18637/jss.v067.i01 · Cited by 86,835 · cited 2× · see citing works
“Table 2: Outcome of the lmer analysis (Bates et al., 2015) of the Adelman et al.”
BackgroundFaul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., & Buchner, A. (2007) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/bf03193146 · Cited by 65,971 · see citing works
Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items
Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J., & Bates, D. M. (2008) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.1016/j.jml.2007.12.005 · Cited by 8,540 · see citing works
Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science
Open Science Collaboration (2015) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aac4716 · Cited by 8,515 · see citing works
Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience
Button, K. S., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Mokrysz, C., Nosek, B. A., Flint, J., Robinson, E. S. J., & Munafò, M. R. (2013) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn3475 · Cited by 7,641 · see citing works
Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., & Simonsohn, U. (2011) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0956797611417632 · Cited by 6,567 · cited 1× · see citing works
“What must be avoided, is that authors try out the various options and only report the one that produces a “significant” effect, a phenomenon known as p-hacking (Simmons et al., 2011).”
BackgroundAnalyzing Linguistic Data: A Practical Introduction to Statistics using R
Baayen, R. H. (2008) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511801686 · Cited by 3,253 · see citing works
The New Statistics: Why and How
Cumming, G. (2014) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0956797613504966 · Cited by 3,200 · cited 1× · see citing works
“First, p-values show wide sample-to-sample variability, particularly when they are based on studies with small sample sizes (Cumming, 2014; Halsey, Curran-Everett, Vowler, & Drummond, 2015).”
Background<scp>SIMR</scp> : an R package for power analysis of generalized linear mixed models by simulation
Green, P., & MacLeod, C. J. (2016) · Methods in Ecology and Evolution · doi:10.1111/2041-210x.12504 · Cited by 2,467 · cited 1× · see citing works
“A particularly interesting R package is simR (Green & MacLeod, 2016; Green, MacLeod, & Alday, 2016).2 2 The authors thank Jason Geller for pointing them to this package.”
BackgroundAnalyzing linguistic data: a practical introduction to statistics using R
Dévière, E. (2009) · Journal of Applied Statistics · doi:10.1080/02664760802366783 · Cited by 2,347 · cited 2× · see citing works
“Some authors demand the use of transformations to get normal distributions (e.g., Baayen, 2008).”
BackgroundHARKing: Hypothesizing after the results are known
Kerr, N. L. (1998) · Personality and Social Psychology Review · doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr0203_4 · Cited by 1,989 · see citing works
The statistical power of abnormal-social psychological research: A review.
Cohen, J. (1962) · The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0045186 · Cited by 1,824 · cited 5× · see citing works
“Even so, Cohen (1962) showed that many experiments published in the established psychology journals have a power considerably below 80% (often as low as 30–40%).”
BackgroundInfluentialPublication bias in the social sciences: Unlocking the file drawer
Franco, A., Malhotra, N., & Simonovits, G. (2014) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1255484 · Cited by 1,542 · see citing works
Beyond Power Calculations: Assessing Type S (Sign) and Type M (Magnitude) Errors
Gelman, A., & Carlin, J. (2014) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691614551642 · Cited by 1,343 · cited 1× · see citing works
“…problem combined with low power not only results in published papers with effects that do not exist at the population level, but also leads to an unacceptably high number of publications reporting and interpreting effects opposite to the one present at the population level (Gelman & Carlin, 2014).”
BackgroundNegative results are disappearing from most disciplines and countries
Fanelli, D. (2012) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-011-0494-7 · Cited by 1,248 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Second, there is a file drawer problem (Fanelli, 2011; Franco, Malhotra, & Simonovits, 2014).”
BackgroundLo, S., & Andrews, S. (2015) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01171 · Cited by 978 · cited 2× · see citing works
“Others warn that transformations may alter the nature of the data (e.g., a logarithmic transformation may alter the interactions between independent variables; Lo & Andrews, 2015).”
BackgroundMethodWestfall, J., Kenny, D. A., & Judd, C. M. (2014) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: General · doi:10.1037/xge0000014 · Cited by 928 · cited 14× · see citing works
“First, Westfall et al. (2014) showed how you can calculate the effect size (measured as d) for a design with random participants and random items.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialThe natural selection of bad science
Smaldino, P. E., & McElreath, R. (2016) · Royal Society Open Science · doi:10.1098/rsos.160384 · Cited by 860 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Unless these are based on a proper power analysis, it is to be expected that many of these “reasons” will be fallacies aimed at decreasing the work load rather than cherishing the quality of the research done (Smaldino & McElreath, 2016).”
BackgroundAn adjusted boxplot for skewed distributions
Hubert, M., & Vandervieren, E. (2008) · Computational Statistics & Data Analysis · doi:10.1016/j.csda.2007.11.008 · Cited by 834 · cited 1× · see citing works
“As is general practice, RTs of error trials and outliers were excluded (outliers were detected using an adjusted boxplot for skewed distributions, Hubert & Vandervieren, 2008).”
MethodThe fickle P value generates irreproducible results
Halsey, L. G., Curran‐Everett, D., Vowler, S. L., & Drummond, G. B. (2015) · Nature Methods · doi:10.1038/nmeth.3288 · Cited by 753 · see citing works
Measurement error and the replication crisis
Loken, E., & Gelman, A. (2017) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aal3618 · Cited by 628 · cited 1× · see citing works
“The consequences of underpowered studies are becoming increasingly clear (Loken & Gelman, 2017).”
BackgroundExperiments with More Than One Random Factor: Designs, Analytic Models, and Statistical Power
Judd, C. M., Westfall, J., & Kenny, D. A. (2017) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-122414-033702 · Cited by 466 · cited 1× · see citing works
“They are not more difficult to run anymore and better fit the data (Judd et al., 2017).”
BackgroundKühberger, A., Fritz, A., & Scherndl, T. (2014) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0105825 · Cited by 399 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Because such p-values require large observed effect sizes in small designs, the effects sizes reported in the literature tend to be inflated, also those from studies that can be replicated (Kuhberger et al., 2014; Open Science Collaboration, 2015; Vasishth & Gelman, 2017).”
ResultKeuleers, E., Lacey, P., Rastle, K., & Brysbaert, M. (2011) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/s13428-011-0118-4 · Cited by 391 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Keuleers et al. (2012) observed that with a group of 40 participants, one needs 160 words and 160 nonwords per condition to find a word frequency effect of 20 ms with a power of .80 (this is a total of 40 * 160 * 4 = 25,600 observations, of which half are not used in the analysis, namely the data…”
BackgroundSelf-citationA Bayesian Perspective on the Reproducibility Project: Psychology
Etz, A., & Vandekerckhove, J. (2016) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0149794 · Cited by 295 · cited 1× · see citing works
“At the same time, it is becoming clear that the definition of replication success may be less straightforward than assumed at first (Amrhein, Korner-Nievergelt, & Roth, 2017; Etz & Vandekerckhove, 2016).”
BackgroundThe earth is flat (p > 0.05): significance thresholds and the crisis of unreplicable research
Amrhein, V., Korner-Nievergelt, F., & Roth, T. (2017) · PeerJ · doi:10.7717/peerj.3544 · Cited by 293 · see citing works
A meta-analysis of syntactic priming in language production
Mahowald, K., James, A. N., Futrell, R., & Gibson, E. (2016) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.1016/j.jml.2016.03.009 · Cited by 261 · see citing works
Keuleers, E., Diependaele, K., & Brysbaert, M. (2010) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00174 · Cited by 241 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Keuleers et al. (2012) observed that with a group of 40 participants, one needs 160 words and 160 nonwords per condition to find a word frequency effect of 20 ms with a power of .”
BackgroundSelf-citationLow statistical power in biomedical science: a review of three human research domains
Dumas-Mallet, E., Button, K. S., Boraud, T., Gonon, F., & Munafò, M. R. (2017) · Royal Society Open Science · doi:10.1098/rsos.160254 · Cited by 208 · see citing works
The Psychology of Replication and Replication in Psychology
Francis, G. (2012) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691612459520 · Cited by 205 · cited 1× · see citing works
“As a result, chances of publishing type I errors are considerably higher than the 5% expected when one uses the p < .05 criterion (Francis, 2012; Leggett, Thomas, Loetscher, & Nicholls, 2013; Simmons, Nelson, & Simonsohn, 2011).”
MethodKgolo-Lotshwao, N. N., & Eisenbeiß, S. (2015) · Language Cognition and Neuroscience · doi:10.1080/23273798.2015.1053813 · Cited by 107 · cited 1× · see citing works
“…et al. (2015) Lexical decision 8 191 50 1194 Ussishkin et al. (2015) Exp 2a Lexical decision 3 66 36 792 Exp 2b Lexical decision 3 70 36 840 Kgolo & Eisenbeiss (2015) Exp 1 Lexical decision 7 70 55 550 Exp 2 Lexical decision 8 63 55 433 Exp 3 Lexical decision 8 65 55 446 Sulpizio & Job…”
Non-cognate translation priming in masked priming lexical decision experiments: A meta-analysis
Wen, Y., & van Heuven, W. J. B. (2016) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/s13423-016-1151-1 · Cited by 92 · cited 3× · see citing works
“It tells us that the estimates of Westfall et al. (2014) are too optimistic.”
BackgroundMethodArticle Commentary: On the Persistence of Low Power in Psychological Science
Vankov, I., Bowers, J., & Munafò, M. R. (2014) · Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1080/17470218.2014.885986 · Cited by 82 · see citing works
Brysbaert, M., Lagrou, E., & Stevens, M. A. (2016) · Bilingualism: Language and Cognition · doi:10.1017/s1366728916000353 · Cited by 81 · see citing works
Self-citationA behavioral database for masked form priming
Adelman, J. S., Johnson, R. L., McCormick, S. F., McKague, M., Kinoshita, S., Bowers, J. S., Perry, J. R., Lupker, S. J., Forster, K. I., Cortese, M. J., et al. (2014) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/s13428-013-0442-y · Cited by 77 · cited 29× · see citing works
“For the Adelman et al. (2014) database, one requires some 6,000 observations for a properly powered experiment (e.g., 60 participants and 100 stimuli, or 80 participants and 80 stimuli, or 100 participants and 60 stimuli).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialEffects of reading proficiency on embedded stem priming in primary school children
Beyersmann, E., Jonathan Grainger, B., Casalis, S., & Ziegler, J. C. (2015) · Journal of Experimental Child Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2015.06.001 · Cited by 65 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Bell et al. (2015) Exp 1 Semantic classification 6 23 120 460 Exp 2 Semantic classification 6 41 120 820 Exp 3 Semantic classification 6 39 120 780 Beyersmann et al. (2015) Lexical decision 8 191 50 1194 Ussishkin et al. (2015) Exp 2a Lexical decision 3 66 36 792 Exp 2b Lexical decision 3 70 36…”
The Life of <i>p</i> : “Just Significant” Results are on the Rise
Leggett, N. C., Thomas, N. A., Loetscher, T., & Nicholls, M. E. R. (2013) · Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1080/17470218.2013.863371 · Cited by 64 · see citing works
A Bayesian bird's eye view of ‘Replications of important results in social psychology’
Marsman, M., Schönbrodt, F. D., Morey, R. D., Yao, Y., Gelman, A., & Wagenmakers, E. (2017) · Royal Society Open Science · doi:10.1098/rsos.160426 · Cited by 50 · see citing works
Auditory masked priming in Maltese spoken word recognition
Ussishkin, A., Dawson, C., Wedel, A., & Schluter, K. (2015) · Language Cognition and Neuroscience · doi:10.1080/23273798.2015.1005635 · Cited by 45 · cited 1× · see citing works
“…460 Exp 2 Semantic classification 6 41 120 820 Exp 3 Semantic classification 6 39 120 780 Beyersmann et al. (2015) Lexical decision 8 191 50 1194 Ussishkin et al. (2015) Exp 2a Lexical decision 3 66 36 792 Exp 2b Lexical decision 3 70 36 840 Kgolo & Eisenbeiss (2015) Exp 1 Lexical decision 7 70…”
Perea, M., Vergara‐Martínez, M., & Gómez, P. (2015) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2015.05.007 · Cited by 41 · cited 1× · see citing works
“What must be avoided, is that authors try out the various options and only report the one that produces a “significant” effect, a phenomenon known as p-hacking (Simmons et al., 2011).”
BackgroundMasked priming of complex movements: perceptual and motor processes in unconscious action perception
Güldenpenning, I., Braun, J., Machlitt, D., & Schack, T. (2014) · Psychological Research · doi:10.1007/s00426-014-0607-z · Cited by 25 · cited 1× · see citing works
“…192 Exp 2 Word naming 6 24 48 192 Exp 3 Word naming 6 24 48 192 Exp 4 Word naming 9 20 56 124 Dasgupta et al. (2015) Lexical decision 10 28 490 1372 Guldenpenning et al. (2015) Exp 1 Action decision 24 44 408 748 Exp 2 Action decision 48 50 576 600 Atas et al. (2015) Direction decision 32 29 2560…”
Kiefer, M., Sim, E. J., & Wentura, D. (2015) · Consciousness and Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.concog.2015.01.010 · Cited by 19 · cited 1× · see citing works
“…408 748 Exp 2 Action decision 48 50 576 600 Atas et al. (2015) Direction decision 32 29 2560 2320 Perea et al. (2015) Lexical decision 4 40 120 1200 Kiefer et al. (2015) Exp 1 Evaluative decision 8 24 384 1152 Exp 2 Evaluative decision 16 24 768 1152 Exp 3 Evaluative decision 2 20 150 1500 should…”
Some cautions regarding statistical power in split-plot designs
Bradley, D. R., & Russell, R. L. (1998) · Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers · doi:10.3758/bf03200681 · Cited by 18 · cited 1× · see citing works
“In contrast, Bradley and Russell (1998), on the basis of simulations, strongly warned against the introduction of an extra, in-between level to a repeated measure, because it decreases the power of the study.”
BackgroundThe statistical significance filter leads to overconfident expectations of replicability
Vasishth, S., & Gelman, A. (2017) · Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1702.00556 · Cited by 14 · cited 1×
“Because such p-values require large observed effect sizes in small designs, the effects sizes reported in the literature tend to be inflated, also those from studies that can be replicated (Kuhberger et al., 2014; Open Science Collaboration, 2015; Vasishth & Gelman, 2017).”
ResultEarly semantic activation in a semantic categorization task with masked primes: Cascaded or not?
Bell, D., Forster, K. I., & Drake, S. (2015) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.1016/j.jml.2015.06.007 · Cited by 11 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Bell et al. (2015) Exp 1 Semantic classification 6 23 120 460 Exp 2 Semantic classification 6 41 120 820 Exp 3 Semantic classification 6 39 120 780 Beyersmann et al. (2015) Lexical decision 8 191 50 1194 Ussishkin et al. (2015) Exp 2a Lexical decision 3 66 36 792 Exp 2b Lexical decision 3 70 36…”
Sulpizio, S., & Job, R. (2015) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01612 · Cited by 10 · cited 1× · see citing works
“…3 70 36 840 Kgolo & Eisenbeiss (2015) Exp 1 Lexical decision 7 70 55 550 Exp 2 Lexical decision 8 63 55 433 Exp 3 Lexical decision 8 65 55 446 Sulpizio & Job (2015) Exp 1 Word naming 6 24 48 192 Exp 2 Word naming 6 24 48 192 Exp 3 Word naming 6 24 48 192 Exp 4 Word naming 9 20 56…”
Atas, A., Anton, E. S., & Cleeremans, A. (2014) · Psychological Research · doi:10.1007/s00426-014-0611-3 · Cited by 9 · cited 1× · see citing works
“…et al. (2015) Lexical decision 10 28 490 1372 Guldenpenning et al. (2015) Exp 1 Action decision 24 44 408 748 Exp 2 Action decision 48 50 576 600 Atas et al. (2015) Direction decision 32 29 2560 2320 Perea et al. (2015) Lexical decision 4 40 120 1200 Kiefer et al. (2015) Exp 1 Evaluative…”
Computational Modeling of Morphological Effects in Bangla Visual Word Recognition
Dasgupta, T., Sinha, M., & Basu, A. (2014) · Journal of Psycholinguistic Research · doi:10.1007/s10936-014-9302-x · Cited by 7 · cited 1× · see citing works
“…55 446 Sulpizio & Job (2015) Exp 1 Word naming 6 24 48 192 Exp 2 Word naming 6 24 48 192 Exp 3 Word naming 6 24 48 192 Exp 4 Word naming 9 20 56 124 Dasgupta et al. (2015) Lexical decision 10 28 490 1372 Guldenpenning et al. (2015) Exp 1 Action decision 24 44 408 748 Exp 2 Action decision 48 50…”
Marsman, M., Schönbrodt, F., Morey, R., Yao, Y.-L., Gelman, A., & Wagenmakers, E. (2017) · Royal Society Open Science · doi:10.1098/rsos.170085 · Cited by 6
Flagged first, then by citations
1 of the 50 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Lakens, D. (2022) · Collabra Psychology · doi:10.1525/collabra.33267 · Cited by 1,962 · see citing works
Lakens, D. (2021) · Collabra: Psychology · doi:10.31234/osf.io/9d3yf · Cited by 1,935
Brysbaert, M. (2019) · Journal of Cognition · doi:10.5334/joc.72 · Cited by 996 · see citing works
“Brysbaert and Stevens (2018) recommended 40 participants and 40 stimuli per condition as good practice in reaction time studies with two repeated-measures conditions.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialSelf-citationBest practice guidance for linear mixed-effects models in psychological science
Meteyard, L., & Davies, R. (2019) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.1016/j.jml.2020.104092 · Cited by 664 · see citing works
How many words do we read per minute? A review and meta-analysis of reading rate
Brysbaert, M. (2019) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.1016/j.jml.2019.104047 · Cited by 553 · see citing works
Self-citationEstimating power in (generalized) linear mixed models: An open introduction and tutorial in R
Kumle, L., Võ, M. L.-H., & Draschkow, D. (2021) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/s13428-021-01546-0 · Cited by 552 · see citing works
“Instead, we wish to highlight an approach introduced in Brysbaert and Stevens (2018).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialHow many words do we read per minute? A review and meta-analysis of reading ratePreprint
Brysbaert, M. (2019) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.31234/osf.io/xynwg · Cited by 512 · see citing works
Self-citationA Practical Primer To Power Analysis for Simple Experimental Designs
Perugini, M., Gallucci, M., & Costantini, G. (2018) · International Review of Social Psychology · doi:10.5334/irsp.181 · Cited by 426 · see citing works
“For more complex designs, such as factorial within-subjects designs and mixed designs, accessible introductions to power analysis can be found in Brysbaert and Stevens (2018) and Guo, Logan, Glueck and Muller (2013).”
MethodMethods in cognitive pupillometry: Design, preprocessing, and statistical analysis
Mathôt, S., & Vilotijević, A. (2022) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/s13428-022-01957-7 · Cited by 235 · see citing works
Baker, D., Vilidaite, G., Lygo, F., Smith, A. K., Flack, T. R., Gouws, A. D., & Andrews, T. (2019) · Psychological methods · doi:10.1037/met0000337 · Cited by 231
“These problems are common across many scientific disciplines, and estimates of power across studies in the neurosciences (Button et al., 2013) yield power values in the range 8–30%, far below the desired level of (cid:2) 80%.”
InfluentialPernet, C. R., Garrido, M. I., Gramfort, A., Maurits, N. M., Michel, C. M., Pang, E. W., Salmelin, R. H., Schoffelen, J., Valdes-Sosa, P. A., & Puce, A. (2020) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/s41593-020-00709-0 · Cited by 245 · see citing works
AI-generated vs. Human Artworks. A Perception Bias Towards Artificial Intelligence?
Ragot, M., Martin, N., & Cojean, S. (2020) · CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA) · doi:10.1145/3334480.3382892 · Cited by 221 · see citing works
“The effect sizes were based on [10] (measured as d ).”
BackgroundSiegelman, N., Schroeder, S., Acartürk, C., Ahn, H.-D., Alexeeva, S., Amenta, S., Bertram, R., Bonandrini, R., Brysbaert, M., Chernova, D., et al. (2022) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/s13428-021-01772-6 · Cited by 160 · see citing works
“This is because each of such conditions would generally meet the 80% power requirement of 40 participants × 40 observations estimated in Brysbaert and Stevens (2018).”
BackgroundSelf-citationCognitive sex differences and hemispheric asymmetry: A critical review of 40 years of research
Hirnstein, M., Hugdahl, K., & Hausmann, M. (2018) · Laterality · doi:10.1080/1357650x.2018.1497044 · Cited by 153 · see citing works
Murayama, K., Usami, S., & Sakaki, M. (2022) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/met0000330 · Cited by 165 · see citing works
“1.5% referred to past work on the power analysis of mixed-effects modelling (e.g., Brysbaert & Stevens, 2018) to justify sample size.”
MethodInfluentialWhat We Owe to Family: The Impact of Special Obligations on Moral Judgment
McManus, R. M., Max Kleiman-weiner, A., & Young, L. (2020) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0956797619900321 · Cited by 154 · see citing works
Oberpriller, J., Leite, M. D. S., & Pichler, M. (2022) · Ecology and Evolution · doi:10.1002/ece3.9062 · Cited by 105 · see citing works
“Moreover, the impact of study design on type I error and power stresses the importance of pre-experiments and power analyses (e.g. Johnson et al. 2015; Green & MacLeod 2016; Brysbaert & Stevens 2018) to maximize the meaningfulness and efficiency of a study.”
You That Read Wrong Again! A Transposed-Word Effect in Grammaticality Judgments
Mirault, J., Snell, J., & Jonathan Grainger, B. (2018) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0956797618806296 · Cited by 98 · see citing works
“We thus ended up collecting 2,320 measurements per ungrammatical condition, meeting the criterion of Brysbaert and Stevens (2018) stating that 1,600 measurements per condition are necessary for sufficient statistical power.”
MethodJaeger, L., & Eckhardt, A. (2020) · Information Systems Journal · doi:10.1111/isj.12317 · Cited by 91 · see citing works
“Effect sizes for our theoretical variables are calculated using Cohen's d (Brysbaert & Stevens, 2018; Cohen, 1988).”
MethodToomer, M., & Elgort, I. (2019) · Language Learning · doi:10.1111/lang.12335 · Cited by 101 · see citing works
What did we learn from forty years of research on semantic interference? A Bayesian meta-analysis
Bürki, A., Elbuy, S., Madec, S., & Vasishth, S. (2020) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.1016/j.jml.2020.104125 · Cited by 124 · see citing works
Gullifer, J. W., & Titone, D. A. (2020) · Journal of experimental psychology. General · doi:10.31234/osf.io/7jq3w · Cited by 7 · see citing works
van Moorselaar, D., Daneshtalab, N., & Slagter, H. (2020) · bioRxiv · doi:10.1101/2020.04.05.026070 · Cited by 84
Examining the Adoption and Abandonment of Security, Privacy, and Identity Theft Protection Practices
Zou, Y., Roundy, K., Tamersoy, A., Shintre, S., Roturier, J., & Schaub, F. (2020) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3313831.3376570 · Cited by 76 · see citing works
“The sample size followed the rule of thumb for linear mixed-effect models – at least 1,600 observations per condition in designs with repeated measures [16].”
Method(Generalized Linear) Mixed‐Effects Modeling: A Learner Corpus Example
Gries, S. Τ. (2021) · Language Learning · doi:10.1111/lang.12448 · Cited by 87 · see citing works
“…different information criteria play in it; validation of models with complex RES; and finally, power analysis for MEMs with complex RES (e.g., see Brysbaert & Stevens, 2018, as well as Meteyard & Davies, 2020, for recent discussions and the R packages of Donohue, 2020; Martin, 2020; Reich,…”
MethodLangenberg, B., Janczyk, M., Koob, V., Kliegl, R. M., & Mayer, A. (2022) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/s13428-022-01902-8 · Cited by 76 · see citing works
Semantic diversity, frequency and the development of lexical quality in children’s word reading
Hsiao, Y., & Nation, K. (2018) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.1016/j.jml.2018.08.005 · Cited by 75 · see citing works
Reading Text When Studying in a Second Language: An Eye‐Tracking Study
Dirix, N., Beken, H. V., Bruyne, E. D., Brysbaert, M., & Duyck, W. (2019) · Reading Research Quarterly · doi:10.1002/rrq.277 · Cited by 74 · see citing works
“Brysbaert and Stevens (2018) reported that a d value of 0.09 calculated with Westfall et al.’s equation turned into an effect size of 0.30 when calculated in an analysis of variance over participants on condition means based on 40 items and to 0.80 when the condition means were based on 350 items.”
MethodInfluentialSelf-citationWild, H. A., Kyröläinen, A.-J., & Kuperman, V. (2022) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0271191 · Cited by 72 · see citing works
Chen, X., Affourtit, J., Ryskin, R., Regev, T. I., Norman-Haignere, S., Jouravlev, O., Malik-Moraleda, S., Kean, H., Varley, R., & Fedorenko, E. (2023) · Cerebral Cortex · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhad087 · Cited by 57 · see citing works
“Abbreviations: β, the beta estimate for the effect; SE, standard error of the mean by participants; df, degrees of freedom; d, Cohen’s d (Westfall et al. 2014; Brysbaert and Stevens 2018); t, the t statistic; P, the significance value (for the individual fROIs, these values have been FDR-corrected for the number of fR…”
BackgroundNakata, T., & Elgort, I. (2020) · Second language Research · doi:10.1177/0267658320927764 · Cited by 71 · see citing works
“The final regression models were subjected to model criticism, potentially harmful outliers (i.e. data points with standardized residuals exceeding 2.5 standard deviations) were removed and the model was refitted (Baayen, 2008; Baayen, Davidson and Bates, 2008; Brysbaert and Stevens, 2018).”
MethodInfluentialWalker, E. A., Redfern, A., & Oleson, J. (2019) · Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research · doi:10.1044/2018_jslhr-l-astm-18-0250 · Cited by 98 · see citing works
“Relative effect sizes were computed following Brysbaert and Stevens (2018).”
MethodHuang, P., Chen, J., Potenza, M. N., Griffiths, M. D., Pakpour, A. H., Chen, J., Lin, Y.-C., Hung, C., O’Brien, K., & Lin, C. (2022) · Journal of Behavioral Addictions · doi:10.1556/2006.2022.00084 · Cited by 66 · see citing works
Meadows, G., Brophy, L., Shawyer, F., Enticott, J. C., Fossey, E., Thornton, C. D., Weller, P. J., Wilson-Evered, E., Edan, V., & Slade, M. (2019) · The Lancet Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/s2215-0366(18)30429-2 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
Zengilowski, A., Schuetze, B. A., Nash, B. L., & Schallert, D. L. (2021) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1080/00461520.2020.1861948 · Cited by 64 · see citing works
“These tools cannot be used when a researcher includes only one-topic/two-texts in a study, but can only be employed to their full capacity when there is adequate sampling of texts in a study (Brysbaert & Stevens, 2018).”
BackgroundPatri, J.-F., Cavallo, A., Pullar, K. F., Soriano, M., Valente, M., Koul, A., Avenanti, A., Panzeri, S., & Becchio, C. (2020) · bioRxiv · doi:10.1101/2020.04.18.047787 · Cited by 57
How to embrace variation and accept uncertainty in linguistic and psycholinguistic data analysisPreprint
Vasishth, S., & Gelman, A. (2019) · Linguistics · doi:10.31234/osf.io/zcf8s · Cited by 57 · see citing works
“Accessible tutorials for automating the simulation-based power computation process are also available (Brysbaert and Stevens 2018; DeBruine and Barr 2020).”
MethodBouwer, F., Fahrenfort, J. J., Millard, S. K., Kloosterman, N., & Slagter, H. (2020) · bioRxiv · doi:10.1101/2020.01.08.899278 · Cited by 56
Dong, Y., Liu, Y., & Cai, R. (2018) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00875 · Cited by 60 · see citing works
Moral dilemmas and trust in leaders during a global health crisis
Everett, J. A. C., Colombatto, C., Awad, E., Boggio, P. S., Bos, B., Brady, W. J., Chawla, M., Chituc, V., Chung, D., Drupp, M. A., et al. (2021) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-021-01156-y · Cited by 76 · see citing works
The cognitive basis for the split-attention effect.
Pouw, W. T. J. L., Rop, G., de Koning, B. B., & PAAS, F. G. W. C. (2019) · Journal of Experimental Psychology General · doi:10.1037/xge0000578 · Cited by 55 · see citing works
A mobile approach-avoidance task
Zech, H., Rotteveel, M., DIJK, W. W. V., & van Dillen, L. F. (2020) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/s13428-020-01379-3 · Cited by 57 · see citing works
“…on Experiment 1 indicated that a sample of 150 participants would allow us to detect approach-avoidance effects based on RT ( b = 0.241) and RF ( b = 1.262) with a power of 99% (for method used, see Brysbaert & Stevens, 2018, and the project ’ s Open Science Framework page; https://osf.io/y5b32/).”
MethodInfluentialAn fMRI Study of Response and Semantic Conflict in the Stroop Task
Parris, B. A., Wadsley, M. G., Hasshim, N., Benattayallah, A., Augustinova, M., & Ferrand, L. (2019) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02426 · Cited by 49 · see citing works
Best Practices in Data Analysis and Sharing in Neuroimaging using MEEGPreprint
Pernet, C. R., Garrido, M. I., Gramfort, A., Maurits, N. M., Michel, C. M., Pang, E. W., Salmelin, R. H., Schoffelen, J., Valdes-Sosa, P. A., & Puce, A. (2018) · doi:10.31219/osf.io/a8dhx · Cited by 56 · see citing works
Proactive distractor suppression elicited by statistical regularities in visual search
Huang, C., Vilotijević, A., Theeuwes, J., & Donk, M. (2021) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/s13423-021-01891-3 · Cited by 64 · see citing works
“This approach provides more power and can deal with unbalanced design and missing data (Brysbaert & Stevens, 2018).”
BackgroundThe Role of Figurative Complexity in the Comprehension and Appreciation of Advertisements
Sobrino, P. P., Littlemore, J., & Houghton, D. (2018) · Applied Linguistics · doi:10.1093/applin/amy039 · Cited by 74 · see citing works
The Role of Crosslinguistic Influence in Multilingual Processing: Lexicon Versus Syntax
Lago, S., Mosca, M., & Garcia, A. S. (2020) · Language Learning · doi:10.31219/osf.io/xc6wd · Cited by 48
Decomposing loss aversion from gaze allocation and pupil dilation
Feng, S., Ramakrishnan, A., Seok, D., Zhao, W. J., Thelaus, S., Cen, P., & Platt, M. L. (2020) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1919670117 · Cited by 67 · see citing works
Luo, W., Kramer, R. P., Kompier, M. E., Smolders, K. C. H. J., de Kort, Y. A. W., & Lichtenbelt, W. D. V. M. (2023) · Building and Environment · doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2023.110380 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
West, G., Melby‐Lervåg, M., & Hulme, C. (2021) · Developmental Psychology · doi:10.1037/dev0001172 · Cited by 53 · see citing works
“…tasks, have poor reliability (Bogaerts, Siegelman, Ben-Porat & Frost, 2017; West et al., 2018) which may reflect the fact that difference scores (Lord, 1958; Overall & Woodward, 1975) and scores derived from short tasks tend to be unreliable (Brysbaert & Stevens, 2018; Nunally & Bernstein, 1994).”
BackgroundPower considerations in bilingualism research: Time to step up our game
Brysbaert, M. (2020) · Bilingualism Language and Cognition · doi:10.1017/s1366728920000437 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
Self-citationGordon, I., Wallot, S., & Berson, Y. (2021) · Psychophysiology · doi:10.1111/psyp.13857 · Cited by 45 · see citing works
“…1.24 BPM .15 1.44 .10 .918 .02 EDA −1.35 1.41 −.96 .339 −.18 BPM:EDA 1.83 1.57 1.17 .241 .25 Note: b are the model coefficients, SE are the coefficients' standard errors, t and p are the associated values of a t- test, testing the coefficient, and the effect size d (see Brysbaert & Stevens, 2018).”
MethodInfluentialBalance between solitude and socializing: everyday solitude time both benefits and harms well-being
Weinstein, N., Vuorre, M., Adams, M., & Nguyen, T. (2023) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-023-44507-7 · Cited by 46 · see citing works
“Our plan to collect up to 3150 data points was also based on recommendations to include a minimum of 1600–1700 data points for mixed effects models with an unclear prior effect size 52–54 .”
MethodStatistical Considerations for Analyzing Ecological Momentary Assessment Data
Oleson, J., Jones, M. A., Jorgensen, E. J., & Wu, Y.-H. (2021) · Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research · doi:10.1044/2021_jslhr-21-00081 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
Manipulating Prior Beliefs Causally Induces Under- and Overconfidence
Marcke, H. V., Denmat, P. L., Verguts, T., & Desender, K. (2024) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/09567976241231572 · Cited by 40 · see citing works
“In doing so, we ensure that we have high experimental power, well above the 1,600 trials per cell usually required of the design, combined across participants and items (Brysbaert & Stevens, 2018).”
BackgroundSlim, M. S., & Hartsuiker, R. J. (2022) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/s13428-022-01989-z · Cited by 48 · see citing works
“This observation has important implications for the required sample size for web-based eye tracking compared to lab-based data, since the required sample size to obtain adequate statistical power relies on the size of the effect (e.g., Brysbaert & Stevens, 2018; Green & MacLeod, 2016).”
MethodHuang, Y., Richter, E., Kleickmann, T., & Richter, D. (2022) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104503 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
Bellovary, A. K., Young, N. A., & Goldenberg, A. (2021) · Affective Science · doi:10.1007/s42761-021-00046-w · Cited by 54 · see citing works
“The simulated power analysis was based on Brysbaert and Stevens’ (2018) recommendations and was conducted using the powerlmm package (Magnusson, 2017) in R.”
MethodConducting linguistic experiments online with OpenSesame and OSWeb
Mathôt, S., & March, J. (2021) · Language Learning · doi:10.31234/osf.io/wnryc · Cited by 43
“Brysbaert and Stevens (2018) recently estimated that a properly powered within-subject experiment requires around 1,600 observations per condition.”
BackgroundThe Application of Signal Detection Theory to Acceptability Judgments
Huang, Y., & Ferreira, F. (2020) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00073 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
Bayesian modeling of temporal expectations in the human brain
Visalli, A., Capizzi, M., Ambrosini, E., Mazzonetto, I., & Vallesi, A. (2019) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.116097 · Cited by 50 · see citing works
Small Samples in Instructed Second Language Acquisition Research
Loewen, S., & Hui, B. (2021) · Modern Language Journal · doi:10.1111/modl.12700 · Cited by 72 · see citing works
Mind-wandering rates fluctuate across the day: evidence from an experience-sampling study
Smith, G., Mills, C., Paxton, A., & Kalina Christoff, A. (2018) · Cognitive Research Principles and Implications · doi:10.1186/s41235-018-0141-4 · Cited by 39 · see citing works
Multilevel mediation analysis in R: A comparison of bootstrap and Bayesian approaches
Falk, C. F., Vogel, T. A., Hammami, S., & Miočević, M. (2023) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/s13428-023-02079-4 · Cited by 44 · see citing works
“In retrospect, this middle of our studied sample sizes is not too far off from what might be acceptable for a two-condition experimental study in cognitive psychology (i.e., 1600 total observations per experimental condition, or 40 participants with 40 trials; Brysbaert & Stevens, 2018).”
Influence of safety climate on risk tolerance and risk-taking behavior: A cross-cultural examination
Bhandari, S., & Hallowell, M. R. (2021) · Safety Science · doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2021.105559 · Cited by 52 · see citing works
Expression Authenticity: The Role of Genuine and Deliberate Displays in Emotion Perception
Zloteanu, M., & Krumhuber, E. G. (2021) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.611248 · Cited by 46 · see citing works
“Using mixed-effects models such variability can easily be accounted for without the need to remove data or make assumptions regarding its validity, thereby allowing for more robust analyses (Brysbaert and Stevens, 2018).”
BackgroundProactive enhancement and suppression elicited by statistical regularities in visual search.
Huang, C., Donk, M., & Theeuwes, J. (2022) · Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception & Performance · doi:10.1037/xhp0001002 · Cited by 66 · see citing works
“Moreover, this approach is known for the merits of utilizing the dataset at an observation level (i.e., trial) that provided us more power to fi nd the true effect (Brysbaert & Stevens, 2018).”
BackgroundA Case for Multisite Second Language Acquisition Research: Challenges, Risks, and Rewards
Moranski, K., & Ziegler, N. (2020) · Language Learning · doi:10.1111/lang.12434 · Cited by 42 · see citing works
The Processing of Linguistic Prominence
Kember, H., Choi, J., Yu, J., & Cutler, A. (2019) · Language and Speech · doi:10.1177/0023830919880217 · Cited by 57 · see citing works
“To check this, we conducted post-hoc power analyses using the R package simR (Green & MacLeod, 2016), a robust tool for calculating power in mixed effects models (Brysbaert & Stevens, 2018).”
MethodNahatame, S. (2021) · Language Learning · doi:10.1111/lang.12455 · Cited by 55 · see citing works
Koval, N. G. (2019) · Applied Psycholinguistics · doi:10.1017/s0142716419000158 · Cited by 49 · see citing works
Spaces for relaxing, spaces for recharging: How parks affect people's emotions
Rapuano, M., Ruotolo, F., Ruggiero, G., Masullo, M., Maffei, L., Galderisi, A., Palmieri, A., & Iachini, T. (2022) · Journal of Environmental Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2022.101809 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
Effect of Indoor Temperature and Glazing with Saturated Color on Visual Perception of Daylight
Chinazzo, G., Wienold, J., & Andersen, M. (2020) · doi:10.1080/15502724.2020.1726182 · Cited by 37
“…estimate the effect size of mixed-effects models with more than one fixed effects as in the present study (we acknowledge however the possibility to perform the calculation of the effect size for simple designs with one fixed effect and two random factors as reported in Brysbaert and Stevens 2018).”
BackgroundEmergent data analysis in phonetic sciences: Towards pluralism and reproducibility
Roettger, T. B., Winter, B., & Baayen, R. H. (2018) · Journal of Phonetics · doi:10.1016/j.wocn.2018.12.001 · Cited by 44 · see citing works
Information transfer within and between autistic and non-autistic people
Crompton, C. J., Foster, S. J., Wilks, C. E. H., Dodd, M., Efthimiou, T. N., Ropar, D., Sasson, N. J., Lages, M., & Fletcher‐Watson, S. (2025) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-025-02163-z · Cited by 40 · see citing works
“A priori power analyses for linear mixed-effect models are notoriously difficult to conduct and require simulation studies 81,82 .”
Angele, B., Baciero, A., Gómez, P., & Perea, M. (2022) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/s13428-021-01742-y · Cited by 41 · see citing works
Balkaran, B. L., Jaffe, D. H., Umuhire, D., Rive, B., & Milz, R. (2021) · BMC Psychiatry · doi:10.1186/s12888-021-03255-6 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
“Effect size were calculated using Cohen’s d approximation adjusted for use of multilevel modeling [42].”
MethodInformation Integration and Mesoscopic Cortical Connectivity during Propofol Anesthesia
Liang, Z., Cheng, L., Shao, S., Jin, X., Yu, T., SLEIGH, J. W., & Xiaoli Li, A. (2019) · Anesthesiology · doi:10.1097/aln.0000000000003015 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
The role of sensorimotor processes in social group contagion
Cracco, E., & Braß, M. (2018) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2018.02.001 · Cited by 43 · see citing works
Hotz, I., Deschwanden, P. F., Liem, F., Mérillat, S., Malagurski, B., Kollias, S., & Jäncke, L. (2021) · Human Brain Mapping · doi:10.1002/hbm.25739 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
“Relative effect sizes were calculated following Brysbaert and Stevens (2018) and according to Westfall, Kenny, and Judd (2014).”
MethodA beginner’s guide to eye tracking for psycholinguistic studies of reading
Schotter, E. R., & Dillon, B. (2025) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/s13428-024-02572-4 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
“…measures over both participants and items), a general recommendation is that a properly powered reaction time experiment (and note that fixation durations are technically reaction times) should have at least 1600 observations (40 participants, 40 stimuli) per condition (Brysbaert & Stevens, 2018).”
Kosie, J. E., & Lew‐Williams, C. (2024) · Developmental Science · doi:10.1111/desc.13515 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
Ratan, R., Klein, M. S., Ucha, C. R., & Cherchiglia, L. (2022) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104643 · Cited by 39 · see citing works
Reliability and Feasibility of Linear Mixed Models in Fully Crossed Experimental Designs
Scandola, M., & Tidoni, E. (2024) · Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/25152459231214454 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
“Several scholars have detailed the bases of LMMs and have provided suggestions and tools to reduce model complexity (Brysbaert & Stevens, 2018; DeBruine & Barr, 2021; Harrison et al., 2018; Luke, 2017; Matuschek et al., 2017; Singmann & Kellen 2020) and achieve the best compromise between Type I…”
BackgroundTask-specific bilingual effects in Mandarin-English speaking high school students in China
Privitera, A. J., Momenian, M., & Weekes, B. (2022) · Current Research in Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.crbeha.2022.100066 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
Johannes, N., Buijzen, M., & Veling, H. (2020) · Journal of Experimental Psychology General · doi:10.1037/xge0000888 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
“Power calculations with mixed-effects models can be complicated (Brysbaert & Stevens, 2018; DeBruine & Barr, 2019).”
MethodFrom categories to gradience: Auto-coding sociophonetic variation with random forests
Villarreal, D., Clark, L., Hay, J. B., & Watson, K. (2020) · Laboratory Phonology Journal of the Association for Laboratory Phonology · doi:10.5334/labphon.216 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
“…affected confidence ratings—but we again urge caution in not over-interpreting these null results given the likelihood of low power in this model (Brysbaert & Stevens, 2018; Judd et al., 2017; Kirby & Sonderegger, 2018; Westfall et al., 2014).15 15 We fit the same models of confidence as…”
BackgroundResultOn-Field Ski Kinematic According to Leg and Discipline in Elite Alpine Skiers
Alhammoud, M., Hansen, C., Meyer, F., Hautier, C., & Morel, B. (2020) · Frontiers in Sports and Active Living · doi:10.3389/fspor.2020.00056 · Cited by 32
Unified syntax in the bilingual mind
Declerck, M., Wen, Y., Snell, J., Meade, G. F., & Jonathan Grainger, B. (2019) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/s13423-019-01666-x · Cited by 50 · see citing works
Beyond emotional similarity: The role of situation-specific motives.
Goldenberg, A., García, D., Halperin, E., Zaki, J., Kong, D., Golarai, G., & Gross, J. J. (2019) · Journal of Experimental Psychology General · doi:10.1037/xge0000625 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
Effects of peer observation on risky decision-making in adolescence: A meta-analytic review.
Powers, K. E., Schaefer, L., Figner, B., & Somerville, L. H. (2022) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/bul0000382 · Cited by 36 · see citing works
“Cohen ’ s d for mixed-effects models was computed using the formulas provided in Westfall et al. (2014); see also Brysbaert and Stevens (2018).”
MethodDelayed gaze shifts away from others’ eyes in children and adolescents with social anxiety disorder
Kleberg, J. L., Högström, J., Sundström, K., Frick, A., & Serlachius, E. (2020) · Journal of Affective Disorders · doi:10.1016/j.jad.2020.09.022 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
Immediate sensorimotor grounding of novel concepts learned from language alone
Guenther, F., Nguyen, T., Chen, L., Dudschig, C., Kaup, B., & Glenberg, A. M. (2020) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.31234/osf.io/gs69k · Cited by 31
Akbaş, T., Neptune, R. R., & Sulzer, J. S. (2019) · Frontiers in Neurology · doi:10.3389/fneur.2019.00301 · Cited by 36 · see citing works
Earth-Gravity Congruent Motion Facilitates Ocular Control for Pursuit of Parabolic Trajectories
Jörges, B., & López-Moliner, J. (2019) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-019-50512-6 · Cited by 31
Evidence of SQUARC and distance effects in a weight comparison task
Dalmaso, M., & Vicovaro, M. (2019) · Cognitive Processing · doi:10.1007/s10339-019-00905-2 · Cited by 31
Erritzøe, D., Barba, T., Spriggs, M. J., Rosas, F. E., Nutt, D., & Carhart-Harris, R. L. (2024) · Journal of Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1177/02698811241237870 · Cited by 33 · see citing works
Kelty‐Stephen, D. G., Lee, J.-H., Cole, K. R., Shields, R. K., & Mangalam, M. (2023) · Perceptual and Motor Skills · doi:10.1177/00315125221149147 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
“…report an approximation of effect sizes for all covariates—both an intraclass coefficient to confirm that random effects played only a small role in the performance of the model (Lorah, 2018) and an analogue of Cohen’s d for mixed-effects modeling (Brysbaert & Stevens, 2018; Westfall et al., 2014).”
MethodArndt, H. L., Granfeldt, J., & Gullberg, M. (2022) · Language Learning · doi:10.1111/lang.12555 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
When time stands upright: STEARC effects along the vertical axis
Dalmaso, M., Schnapper, Y., & Vicovaro, M. (2022) · Psychological Research · doi:10.1007/s00426-022-01693-9 · Cited by 30
“Sample size was determined by following the guidelines for linear mixed-effects models including subjects and items as random factors (Brysbaert & Stevens, 2018).”
Method
- Authors
- Brysbaert, M., & Stevens, M.
- Affiliations
- Ghent University (BE)
- Corresponding author
- Brysbaert, Marc
- ORCID
- Brysbaert, Marc
- Venue
- Journal of Cognition
- Publisher
- Ubiquity Press, Ltd.
- Published
- 2018
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 9-9
- ISSN
- 2514-4820 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC6646942
- OpenAlex
- W2783948250
- Cited by
- 1,420
- References
- 50
- Citations by year
- 2026: 154 · 2025: 290 · 2024: 189 · 2023: 195 · 2022: 195 · 2021: 162 · 2020: 130 · 2019: 73 · 2018: 31 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 82.16
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Cognition (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
- OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- 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 › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Psychology Research and Bibliometrics
- Keywords
- power analysis, effect size, mixed models, replication, cognitive psychology, masked priming, reaction time, repeated measures, sample size, meta-analysis, statistical power
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
