A close consideration of effect sizes reviewed by Jussim (2012)

David Trafimow; Yogesh J. Raut

doi:10.1017/S0140525X15002423

A close consideration of effect sizes reviewed by Jussim (2012)

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 22 March 2017

David Trafimow and

Yogesh J. Raut

Show author details

David Trafimow: Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM 88003-8001. [email protected]@nmsu.eduhttp://psych.nmsu.edu/faculty/trafimow/
Yogesh J. Raut: Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM 88003-8001. [email protected]@nmsu.eduhttp://psych.nmsu.edu/faculty/trafimow/

Article contents

Abstract
References

Get access

Rights & Permissions

Abstract

This commentary on Jussim (2012) makes two points: (1) Effect sizes often reflect artifacts of experimental design rather than real-world relevance, and (2) any argument dependent on effect sizes must correct for attenuation due to instrument reliabilities. A formula for making this correction is presented, and its ramifications on the debate over accuracy in person perception are discussed.

Type: Open Peer Commentary
Information: Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 40 , 2017 , e15

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X15002423 [Opens in a new window]
Copyright: Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allen, M. J. & Yen, W. M. (1979) Introduction to measurement theory. Brooks/Cole.Google Scholar

Gulliksen, H. (1987) Theory of mental tests. Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Hsu, L. M. (2004) Biases of success rate differences shown in binomial effect size displays. Psychological Methods 9(2):183–97. Available at: http://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.9.2.183 Google Scholar

Jussim, L. (2012) Social perception and social reality: Why accuracy dominates bias and self-fulfilling prophecy. Oxford University Press.CrossRef Google Scholar