0

I submitted a paper in which I analyzed the data by a mixed design ANOVA. I reported generalized eta squared as effect size. After significant interactions, I conducted planned comparisons. A reviewer suggested me that I have to report planned comparisons only when an effect is significant with a sufficiently large effect size, based on the Cohen's rules of thumb.

My question is: what is to be considered as a sufficiently large effect size? I'm not sure of what is (for the reviewer) a sufficiently large effect size. Following the Cohen's rules of thumb, I would consider a generalized eta squared of at least .02 (small) as sufficient to conduct planned comparisons. In your opinion, is this approach correct or I have to consider only significant effect with medium to large effect sizes?

Thanks.

this.is.not.a.nick
  • 862
  • 2
  • 13
  • 25
  • 1
    Maybe you'll find this helpful: http://imaging.mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk/statswiki/FAQ/effectSize – Tim Dec 04 '14 at 09:11
  • Thank you Tim. I had already read that, but my question regards the meaning of "sufficiently large". In your opinion, may a generalized eta squared of .02 be considered sufficiently large for planned comparisons? – this.is.not.a.nick Dec 04 '14 at 09:34
  • "Sufficiently" is not really precise, so you could guess if your reviewer meant rather "medium" or "large". It is up to you. You can always answer your reviewer why while your effect is of certain size your results have a practical significance that makes them valuable (if it is so). – Tim Dec 04 '14 at 09:39
  • I also think that "sufficiently" is a bit imprecise For this reason I posted this question. Thanks again. – this.is.not.a.nick Dec 04 '14 at 09:42

0 Answers0