RESEARCH METHOD COHEN ok

RESEARCH METHOD COHEN ok RESEARCH METHOD COHEN ok

12.01.2015 Views

EFFECT SIZE 523 Box 24.17 The Levene test for equality of variances Levene’s test for equality of variances Independent samples test t-test for equality of means Chapter 24 How well learners are cared for, guided and supported Equal variances assumed Equal variances not assumed 95 % confidence interval of the difference Sig. Mean SE F Sig. t df (2-tailed) difference difference Lower Upper 8.344 0.004 1.923 998 0.055 0.30 0.155 −0.006 0.603 2.022 811.922 0.044 0.30 0.148 0.009 0.589 The effect size can be worked out thus (using SPSS): t 2 t 2 + (N 1 − 1) = 16.588 2 16.588 2 + (1000 − 1) = 275.162 275.162 + 999 = 0.216 In this example the effect size is 0.216, a very large effect, i.e. there was a very substantial difference between the scores of the two groups. For analysis of variance (discussed later) the effect size is calculated thus: Eta squared = Sum of squares between groups Total sum of squares In SPSS this is given as ‘partial eta squared’. For example, let us imagine that we wish to compute the effect size of the difference between four groups of schools on mathematics performance in a public examination. The four groups of schools are: rural primary; rural secondary; urban primary; urban secondary. Analysis of variance yields the result shown in Box 24.20. Working through the formula yields the following: Sum of squares between groups = 7078.619 Total sum of squares 344344.8 =0.021 alternative equations to take account of Box 24.18 Mean and standard deviation in a paired sample test Paired samples statistics Mean N SD SE mean Pair Maths 81.71 1,000 23.412 0.740 1 Science 67.26 1,000 27.369 0.865 The figure of 0.021 indicates a small effect size, i.e. that there is a small difference between the four groups in their mathematics performance (note that this is a much smaller difference than that indicated by the significance level of 0.006, which suggests a statistically highly significant difference between the four groups of schools. In regression analysis (discussed later) the effect size of the predictor variables is given by the beta weightings. In interpreting effect size here Muijs (2004: 194) gives the following guidance: 0–0.1 weak effect 0.1–0.3 modest effect 0.3–0.5 moderate effect >0.5 strong effect Hedges (1981) and Hunter et al. (1982) suggest

524 QUANTITATIVE DATA ANALYSIS Box 24.19 Difference test for a paired sample Paired samples test Paired differences 95 % confidence interval of the difference Mean SD SE mean Lower Upper t df Sig. (2-tailed) Pair 1 Maths-Science 14.45 27.547 0.871 12.74 16.16 16.588 999 0.000 Box 24.20 Effect size in analysis of variance Maths ANOVA Sum of squares df Mean square F Sig. Between groups 7078.619 3 2359.540 4.205 0.006 Within groups 337266.2 601 561.175 Total 344344.8 604 differential weightings due to sample size variations. The two most frequently used indices of effect sizes are standardized mean differences and correlations (Hunter et al. 1982:373),although non-parametric statistics, e.g. the median, can be used. Lipsey (1992: 93–100) sets out a series of statistical tests for working on effect sizes, effect size means and homogeneity. Muijs (2004: 126) indicates that a measure of effect size for cross-tabulations, instead of chisquare, should be phi, whichisthesquarerootof the calculated value of chi-square divided by the overall valid sample size. He gives an example: ‘if chi-square = 14.810 and the sample size is 885 then phi = 14.810/885 = 0.0167 and then take the square root of this = 0.129’. Effect sizes are susceptible to a range of influences. These include (Coe 2000): Restricted range: the smaller the range of scores, the greater is the possibility of a higher effect size, therefore it is important to use the standard deviation of the whole population (and not just one group), i.e. a pooled standard deviation, in calculating the effect size. It is important to report the possible restricted range or sampling here (e.g. a group of highly able students rather than, for example, the whole ability range). Non-normal distributions: effect size usually assumes a normal distribution, so any non-normal distributions would have to be reported. Measurement reliability: the reliability (accuracy, stability and robustness) of the instrument being used (e.g. the longer the test, or the more items that are used to measure a factor, the more reliable it could be). There are downloadable software programs available that will calculate effect size simply by the researcher keying in minimal amounts of data, for example: The Effect Size Generator by Grant Devilly: http://www.swin.edu.au/victims

524 QUANTITATIVE DATA ANALYSIS<br />

Box 24.19<br />

Difference test for a paired sample<br />

Paired samples test<br />

Paired differences<br />

95 % confidence<br />

interval of the difference<br />

Mean SD SE mean Lower Upper t df Sig. (2-tailed)<br />

Pair 1 Maths-Science 14.45 27.547 0.871 12.74 16.16 16.588 999 0.000<br />

Box 24.20<br />

Effect size in analysis of variance<br />

Maths<br />

ANOVA<br />

Sum of squares df Mean square F Sig.<br />

Between groups 7078.619 3 2359.540 4.205 0.006<br />

Within groups 337266.2 601 561.175<br />

Total 344344.8 604<br />

differential weightings due to sample size<br />

variations. The two most frequently used indices of<br />

effect sizes are standardized mean differences and<br />

correlations (Hunter et al. 1982:373),although<br />

non-parametric statistics, e.g. the median, can be<br />

used. Lipsey (1992: 93–100) sets out a series of<br />

statistical tests for working on effect sizes, effect<br />

size means and homogeneity.<br />

Muijs (2004: 126) indicates that a measure of<br />

effect size for cross-tabulations, instead of chisquare,<br />

should be phi, whichisthesquarerootof<br />

the calculated value of chi-square divided by the<br />

overall valid sample size. He gives an example:<br />

‘if chi-square = 14.810 and the sample size is 885<br />

then phi = 14.810/885 = 0.0167 and then take<br />

the square root of this = 0.129’.<br />

Effect sizes are susceptible to a range of<br />

influences. These include (Coe 2000):<br />

<br />

Restricted range: the smaller the range of scores,<br />

the greater is the possibility of a higher effect<br />

size, therefore it is important to use the standard<br />

<br />

<br />

deviation of the whole population (and not just<br />

one group), i.e. a pooled standard deviation,<br />

in calculating the effect size. It is important to<br />

report the possible restricted range or sampling<br />

here (e.g. a group of highly able students rather<br />

than, for example, the whole ability range).<br />

Non-normal distributions: effect size usually<br />

assumes a normal distribution, so any<br />

non-normal distributions would have to be<br />

reported.<br />

Measurement reliability: the reliability (accuracy,<br />

stability and robustness) of the instrument<br />

being used (e.g. the longer the test, or the more<br />

items that are used to measure a factor, the<br />

more reliable it could be).<br />

There are downloadable software programs<br />

available that will calculate effect size simply by<br />

the researcher keying in minimal amounts of data,<br />

for example:<br />

<br />

The Effect Size Generator by Grant Devilly:<br />

http://www.swin.edu.au/victims

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!