Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Why small low-powered studies are worse than large high-powered studies and how to protect against "trivial" findings in research: comment on Friston (2012)
Stockholm University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Stress Research Institute.
2013 (English)In: NeuroImage, ISSN 1053-8119, E-ISSN 1095-9572, Vol. 81, 496-498 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

It is sometimes argued that small studies provide better evidence for reported effects because they are less likely to report findings with small and trivial effect sizes (Friston, 2012). But larger studies are actually better at protecting against inferences from trivial effect sizes, if researchers just make use of effect sizes and confidence intervals. Poor statistical power also comes at a cost of inflated proportion of false positive findings, less power to "confirm" true effects and bias in reported (inflated) effect sizes. Small studies (n=16) lack the precision to reliably distinguish small and medium to large effect sizes (r<.50) from random noise (α=.05) that larger studies (n=100) does with high level of confidence (r=.50, p=.00000012). The present paper presents the arguments needed for researchers to refute the claim that small low-powered studies have a higher degree of scientific evidence than large high-powered studies.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2013. Vol. 81, 496-498 p.
Keyword [en]
Statistical power, False positive findings, Inflated effect sizes
National Category
Probability Theory and Statistics Other Social Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:su:diva-99681DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.03.030PubMedID: 23583358Local ID: P3125OAI: oai:DiVA.org:su-99681DiVA: diva2:687940
Available from: 2014-01-15 Created: 2014-01-15 Last updated: 2017-11-20Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Ingre, Michael
By organisation
Stress Research Institute
In the same journal
NeuroImage
Probability Theory and StatisticsOther Social Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 33 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf