Misunderstandings of Effect Sizes in Message Effects Research

Daniel James O'Keefe*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Widespread acknowledgement of the weaknesses of null hypothesis significance testing has led to correspondingly greater appreciation of the central role of effect size estimation in social-scientific research. But in the context of message effects research, it is easy to confuse an effect size—a quantitative representation of the effect of a variable on an outcome—with the size of the effect of a message on an outcome. Illustrations of this misunderstanding are offered, its unhappy consequences specified, and remedies discussed.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)210-219
Number of pages10
JournalCommunication Methods and Measures
Volume11
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 3 2017

Fingerprint

Testing
remedies

Keywords

  • Effect sizes
  • message effects
  • meta-analysis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Communication

Cite this

@article{0c329c011ff948c1ae2fb66818bef5af,
title = "Misunderstandings of Effect Sizes in Message Effects Research",
abstract = "Widespread acknowledgement of the weaknesses of null hypothesis significance testing has led to correspondingly greater appreciation of the central role of effect size estimation in social-scientific research. But in the context of message effects research, it is easy to confuse an effect size—a quantitative representation of the effect of a variable on an outcome—with the size of the effect of a message on an outcome. Illustrations of this misunderstanding are offered, its unhappy consequences specified, and remedies discussed.",
keywords = "Effect sizes, message effects, meta-analysis",
author = "O'Keefe, {Daniel James}",
year = "2017",
month = "7",
day = "3",
doi = "10.1080/19312458.2017.1343812",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "11",
pages = "210--219",
journal = "Communication Methods and Measures",
issn = "1931-2458",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "3",

}

Misunderstandings of Effect Sizes in Message Effects Research. / O'Keefe, Daniel James.

In: Communication Methods and Measures, Vol. 11, No. 3, 03.07.2017, p. 210-219.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Misunderstandings of Effect Sizes in Message Effects Research

AU - O'Keefe, Daniel James

PY - 2017/7/3

Y1 - 2017/7/3

N2 - Widespread acknowledgement of the weaknesses of null hypothesis significance testing has led to correspondingly greater appreciation of the central role of effect size estimation in social-scientific research. But in the context of message effects research, it is easy to confuse an effect size—a quantitative representation of the effect of a variable on an outcome—with the size of the effect of a message on an outcome. Illustrations of this misunderstanding are offered, its unhappy consequences specified, and remedies discussed.

AB - Widespread acknowledgement of the weaknesses of null hypothesis significance testing has led to correspondingly greater appreciation of the central role of effect size estimation in social-scientific research. But in the context of message effects research, it is easy to confuse an effect size—a quantitative representation of the effect of a variable on an outcome—with the size of the effect of a message on an outcome. Illustrations of this misunderstanding are offered, its unhappy consequences specified, and remedies discussed.

KW - Effect sizes

KW - message effects

KW - meta-analysis

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85023172889&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85023172889&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/19312458.2017.1343812

DO - 10.1080/19312458.2017.1343812

M3 - Article

VL - 11

SP - 210

EP - 219

JO - Communication Methods and Measures

JF - Communication Methods and Measures

SN - 1931-2458

IS - 3

ER -