ScholarGate
어시스턴트

방법 비교

선택한 방법을 나란히 검토하세요. 서로 다른 행은 강조 표시됩니다.

출판 편향×효과 크기×
분야연구 통계연구 통계
계열Process / pipelineProcess / pipeline
기원 연도19791988
창시자Robert RosenthalJacob Cohen
유형ConceptConcept
원전Rosenthal, 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
별칭file drawer problem, selective reporting, outcome reporting bias, funnel plot asymmetryES, Cohen's d, standardized effect, practical significance
관련44
요약Publication 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 Rosenthal (1979) termed this the 'file drawer problem': research with null results sits in file drawers, unpublished, creating a biased sample of published evidence.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.
ScholarGate데이터셋
  1. v1
  2. 3 출처
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 3 출처
  3. PUBLISHED

검색으로 이동 슬라이드 다운로드

ScholarGate방법 비교: Publication Bias · Effect Size. 2026-06-18에 다음에서 검색함: https://scholargate.app/ko/compare