國立虎尾科技大學 |

When Do Effect Sizes Actually Capture Effects? a Meta-Analytic Review.

紀錄類型:	書目-語言資料,手稿 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	When Do Effect Sizes Actually Capture Effects? a Meta-Analytic Review./
作者:	Amari, Paul Matthew.
面頁冊數:	1 online resource (90 pages)
附註:	Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 84-11.
Contained By:	Masters Abstracts International84-11.
標題:	Psychology. -
電子資源:	click for full text (PQDT)
ISBN:	9798379534288

When Do Effect Sizes Actually Capture Effects? a Meta-Analytic Review.
Amari, Paul Matthew.

When Do Effect Sizes Actually Capture Effects? a Meta-Analytic Review. - 1 online resource (90 pages)

Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 84-11.

Thesis (M.A.)--The University of North Carolina at Charlotte, 2023.

Includes bibliographical references

Effect size benchmarks are used as guidelines for conducting power analysis and Bayesian analysis, guiding theory, interpreting practical significance, and reviewing scientific progress. However, effect size estimates that are correlational directly violate the definition of an "effect", as they do not capture a cause-and-effect relationship. The current work begins with a review of the current state of the literature and presents a continuum of causal-inference strength. Next, to demonstrate this conceptualization, a comprehensive review was conducted of the leadership literature: (1) a second-order meta-analysis of leader individual differences (total k = 1,829; total N = 640,388), (2) meta-analyzed lab and field experiments (total k = 110; total N = 18,402), and (3) a narrative review of effect sizes from quasi-experimental and non-traditional experimental designs. This work concludes with implications for theory and practice, future directions for research, and methodological best practices (e.g., experimental design).

Electronic reproduction.
Ann Arbor, Mich. :
ProQuest,
2024

Mode of access: World Wide Web

ISBN: 9798379534288Subjects--Topical Terms:

555998
Psychology.
Subjects--Index Terms:

Causal inferenceIndex Terms--Genre/Form:

554714
Electronic books.

When Do Effect Sizes Actually Capture Effects? a Meta-Analytic Review.
LDR:02441ntm a2200409K 4500 001 1141135
005 20231130111622.5
006 m o d
007 cr mn ---uuuuu
008 250605s2023 xx obm 000 0 eng d
020 $a 9798379534288
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI30490031
035 $a AAI30490031
040 $a MiAaPQ $b eng $c MiAaPQ $d NTU
100 1 $a Amari, Paul Matthew. $3 1464753
245 1 0 $a When Do Effect Sizes Actually Capture Effects? a Meta-Analytic Review.
264 0 $c 2023
300 $a 1 online resource (90 pages)
336 $a text $b txt $2 rdacontent
337 $a computer $b c $2 rdamedia
338 $a online resource $b cr $2 rdacarrier
500 $a Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 84-11.
500 $a Advisor: Banks, George.
502 $a Thesis (M.A.)--The University of North Carolina at Charlotte, 2023.
504 $a Includes bibliographical references
520 $a Effect size benchmarks are used as guidelines for conducting power analysis and Bayesian analysis, guiding theory, interpreting practical significance, and reviewing scientific progress. However, effect size estimates that are correlational directly violate the definition of an "effect", as they do not capture a cause-and-effect relationship. The current work begins with a review of the current state of the literature and presents a continuum of causal-inference strength. Next, to demonstrate this conceptualization, a comprehensive review was conducted of the leadership literature: (1) a second-order meta-analysis of leader individual differences (total k = 1,829; total N = 640,388), (2) meta-analyzed lab and field experiments (total k = 110; total N = 18,402), and (3) a narrative review of effect sizes from quasi-experimental and non-traditional experimental designs. This work concludes with implications for theory and practice, future directions for research, and methodological best practices (e.g., experimental design).
533 $a Electronic reproduction. $b Ann Arbor, Mich. : $c ProQuest, $d 2024
538 $a Mode of access: World Wide Web
650 4 $a Psychology. $3 555998
653 $a Causal inference
653 $a Endogeneity bias
653 $a Experiments
653 $a Individual differences
653 $a Leadership effect sizes
653 $a Meta-analysis
655 7 $a Electronic books. $2 local $3 554714
690 $a 0621
690 $a 0624
690 $a 0703
710 2 $a ProQuest Information and Learning Co. $3 1178819
710 2 $a The University of North Carolina at Charlotte. $b Psychology Industrial/Organizational. $3 1464754
773 0 $t Masters Abstracts International $g 84-11.
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=30490031 $z click for full text (PQDT)