ScholarGate
アシスタント

手法を比較

選択した手法を並べて確認できます。異なる行はハイライト表示されます。

出版バイアス×効果量×
分野研究統計研究統計
系統Process / pipelineProcess / pipeline
提唱年19791988
提唱者Robert RosenthalJacob Cohen
種類ConceptConcept
原典Rosenthal, R. (1979). The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin, 86(3), 638–641. DOI ↗Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. ISBN: 0-8058-0283-5
別名file drawer problem, selective reporting, outcome reporting bias, funnel plot asymmetryES, Cohen's d, standardized effect, practical significance
関連44
概要Publication bias occurs when the results of a study influence whether the study is published. Typically, studies with statistically significant or positive results are more likely to be published than studies with non-significant or negative results, even if both are scientifically valid. This bias distorts the published literature, making treatments appear more effective than they actually are. Rosenthal (1979) termed this the 'file drawer problem': research with null results sits in file drawers, unpublished, creating a biased sample of published evidence. Funnel plots and statistical tests (e.g., Egger test) can detect asymmetry suggesting publication bias; meta-analyses must account for this bias.Effect size quantifies the magnitude of a research finding independent of sample size. While a p-value tells you whether a result is statistically significant, an effect size tells you how big the result is. Jacob Cohen formalized effect size measurement in behavioral sciences (1988), establishing standard benchmarks (small = 0.2, medium = 0.5, large = 0.8 for Cohen's d). Effect sizes are essential for meta-analysis, power analysis, and communicating the practical importance of research findings.
ScholarGateデータセット
  1. v1
  2. 3 出典
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 3 出典
  3. PUBLISHED

検索へ スライドをダウンロード

ScholarGate手法を比較: Publication Bias · Effect Size. 2026-06-18に以下より取得 https://scholargate.app/ja/compare