↓ Skip to main content

PLOS

Effect Sizes for 2×2 Contingency Tables

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, March 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
126 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
104 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Effect Sizes for 2×2 Contingency Tables
Published in
PLOS ONE, March 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0058777
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jake Olivier, Melanie L. Bell

Abstract

Sample size calculations are an important part of research to balance the use of resources and to avoid undue harm to participants. Effect sizes are an integral part of these calculations and meaningful values are often unknown to the researcher. General recommendations for effect sizes have been proposed for several commonly used statistical procedures. For the analysis of 2×2 tables, recommendations have been given for the correlation coefficient φ for binary data; however, it is well known that φ suffers from poor statistical properties. The odds ratio is not problematic, although recommendations based on objective reasoning do not exist. This paper proposes odds ratio recommendations that are anchored to φ for fixed marginal probabilities. It will further be demonstrated that the marginal assumptions can be relaxed resulting in more general results.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 104 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 100 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 19 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 17%
Student > Master 11 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 9 9%
Lecturer 5 5%
Other 21 20%
Unknown 21 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 17%
Psychology 9 9%
Engineering 8 8%
Mathematics 7 7%
Sports and Recreations 6 6%
Other 31 30%
Unknown 25 24%