Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Educational and Psychological Measurement
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gaebelein, J. W.
Right arrow Articles by Soderquist, D. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

The Utility of Within-Subjects Variables: Estimates of Strength

Jacquelyn W. Gaebelein

Department of Psychology University of North Carolina at Greensboro

David R. Soderquist

Department of Psychology University of North Carolina at Greensboro

Procedures to estimate the magnitude of a treatment effect are examined for analysis of variance designs which have repeated-measures. It is shown that the estimate of the magnitude of an effect logically follows from the expected mean squares associated with the design in question. In particular, it is argued that the estimate of utility (strength of effect) for a within-subjects variable should be adjusted to reflect the underlying ANOVA model; viz., the inter-subject variability should be removed from the utility estimate.

Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 38, No. 2, 351-360 (1978)
DOI: 10.1177/001316447803800216


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Organizational Research MethodsHome page
J. T. Austin, K. A. Boyle, and J. C. Lualhati
Statistical Conclusion Validity for Organizational Science Researchers: A Review
Organizational Research Methods, April 1, 1998; 1(2): 164 - 208.
[Abstract]