LISTSERV at the University of Georgia
Menubar Imagemap
Home Browse Manage Request Manuals Register
Previous messageNext messagePrevious in topicNext in topicPrevious by same authorNext 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:         Wed, 19 Jul 2006 12:49:53 -0400
Reply-To:     "Dogan, Enis" <edogan@air.org>
Sender:       "SPSSX(r) Discussion" <SPSSX-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
From:         "Dogan, Enis" <edogan@air.org>
Subject:      Re: effect size: eta-squared vs partial eta-squared
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Thanks to all who replied to my question. Any comments on the relationship between partial-eta squared and partial R squared? Also eta-squared looks to me like a part R squared. Any thoughts?

Enis

-----Original Message----- From: SPSSX(r) Discussion [mailto:SPSSX-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of Nicholas J.S. Gibson Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2006 12:37 PM To: SPSSX-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU Subject: Re: effect size: eta-squared vs partial eta-squared

A quick search on "eta" in the archives will confirm that some variant of this question comes up pretty frequently! Unfortunately SPSS still has no capability to report total eta-squared values or the SS values needed to

calculate total eta-squared values for mixed-model ANOVAs by hand (unless this functionality has since been added to SPSS 14/15). When Kyle Weeks last commented on this (Jan 2003 -- see http://www.listserv.uga.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0301&L=spssx-l&P=R2708&m=24 876 ) he said this feature was on the "wish list" but I don't know if it has

since become a reality. If someone knows of development or planned development on this it would be useful to know about it.

Reporting partial eta-squared values would indeed be misleading given that when summed they can exceed 1. Unfortunately without SPSS reporting total eta-squared values it is likely that researchers do erroneously report partial values.

Other articles on this include:

Timothy R. Levine & Craig R. Hullett. (2002). Eta squared, partial eta

squared, and misreporting of effect size in communication research. Human Communication Research, 28, 612-625.

Pierce, C. A., Block, R. A., & Aguinis, H. (2004). Cautionary note on reporting eta-squared values from multifactor ANOVA designs. Educational

and Psychological Measurement, 64, 916-924. http://www.montana.edu/wwwpy/Block/papers/Pierce,Block,&Aguinas-2004.pdf

Nicholas Gibson

-- Nicholas J.S. Gibson, Ph.D. Psychology and Religion Research Group Faculty of Divinity, University of Cambridge West Road, Cambridge, CB3 9BS, UK

tel +44 (0)1223 763010 * mob +44 (0)7970 757524 * fax +44 (0)1223 763003 http://www.divinity.cam.ac.uk/pcp/personnel/nicholas.html

> Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 12:01:26 -0500 > From: "Alexander J. Shackman" <ajshackman@GMAIL.COM> > > see also > > http://web.uccs.edu/lbecker/Psy590/es.htm > and > http://web.uccs.edu/lbecker/SPSS/glm_effectsize.htm > > On 7/18/06, Dogan, Enis <edogan@air.org> wrote: > > > > 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