LISTSERV at the University of Georgia
Menubar Imagemap
Home Browse Manage Request Manuals Register
Previous (more recent) messageNext (less recent) messagePrevious (more recent) in topicNext (less recent) in topicPrevious (more recent) by same authorNext (less recent) by same authorPrevious page (July 2006)Back to main SPSSX-L pageJoin or leave SPSSX-L (or change settings)ReplyPost a new messageSearchProportional fontNon-proportional font
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 18 Jul 2006 12:54:46 -0400
Reply-To:     "Dogan, Enis" <edogan@air.org>
Sender:       "SPSSX(r) Discussion" <SPSSX-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
From:         "Dogan, Enis" <edogan@air.org>
Subject:      effect size: eta-squared vs partial eta-squared
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Dear all

SPSS reports partial et-sq as opposed to eta-squared.

I found in the literature the rule thumb for eta-squared as small (0.01), medium (0.06), and large (0.14) (Cohen, 1988).

Does this apply to partial eta-squared as well?

Also, the definition of eta-squared gives me the idea that it is no different than what some of us call partial R squared.

Am I right?

There is rumor out there that "researchers erroneously report partial eta-squared values as representing classical eta-squared values"

http://carbon.cudenver.edu/~haguinis/APMinpress.pdf

Any value in this argument?

Thanx

Enis


Back to: Top of message | Previous page | Main SPSSX-L page