Sentences with phrase «large effect sizes between»

Not exact matches

CatBirdBaby has improved the designs for the original Mei Tais by making the body of the Mei Tai larger to enable a better wrap - around effect, and lengthening the supportive straps to create more allowance for use between people of different sizes.

• Duke researchers Charles Clotfelter, Helen Ladd, and Jacob Vigdor found that being taught by a sub for 10 days per year has a larger effect on a child's math scores than if he'd changed schools, and about half the size of the difference between students from well - to - do and poor families.

Black and William report that studies of formative assessment show an effect size on standardized tests of between 0.4 and 0.7, larger than most known educational interventions.

The largest effect sizes on academic outcomes for remedial summer school programs that are between 60 and 120 hours in length.

This study goes beyond previous meta - analysis and narrative reviews by testing whether the levels of depressive symptoms differ between types of illness and whether the effect size is influenced by a large number of study characteristics.

Effect sizes of 0.2 - 0.5 are considered small, those between 0.51 - 0.81 are considered moderate, and those over 0.8 are considered large.

The increased number of significant associations between anti-smoking practices and cognitions, as well as the larger effect size at Step 3 in the Grade 9 analyses could indicate this.

Interestingly, the results of our longitudinal meta - analysis found a larger pooled effect size (ORs between 1.20 and 1.58) than the pooled OR of 1.18 reported in the cross-sectional meta - analysis of de Wit et al. 9 Possibly time plays a role in the association between depression and obesity.

The quasi-experimental design reduces spillover effects and makes it easier to implement the program, but does not eliminate the possibility of selection bias.35, 36 The use of prospectively defined controls at quasi-experimental sites likely contributed to minimized discrepancies in outcomes between randomization and quasi-experimental groups.37 For several parenting outcomes, such as discipline practices, findings were of similar magnitude and direction at randomization and quasi-experimental sites, but statistically significant at only quasi-experimental sites, where the sample size was larger; they were significant in the pooled sample, as well.

A larger effect size is more desirable because it suggests less overlap between the 2 populations.

Asymmetry might be due to publication bias, but might also reflect a relationship between trial size and effect size such as when larger trials have lower compliance, and compliance is positively related to effect size.

Of note, the effect size of paternal undermining was the largest difference in parental behaviors found between families with children with an anxiety disorder versus control children; effect sizes for parenting behaviors toward the child (control, rejection) were smaller and non-significant.

We found a trend in the category authoritative parenting (z = 1.92, p < 0.10, k = 12), indicating a trend for the link between higher reliabilities and larger effect sizes.

Results indicated that the overall working alliance scores (t14 = 3.03, P <.001, d = 0.60) and the agreement between therapist and patient on the therapy goals subscale scores (t14 = 2.30, P =.03, d = 0.79) were significantly higher in e-therapy than in face - to - face interventions, with medium to large effect sizes.

Results indicated that there was no significant difference between groups for therapeutic alliance score (t47 = — 1.02, P =.31, d = 0.29; according to Cohen [37], an effect size of 0.2 to 0.3 represents a small effect, around 0.5 represents a medium effect, and 0.8 or greater represents a large effect).

PMT may have significant preventive effects, especially if it is applied during the preschool period, 42 or is a component of broader preventive interventions for school - age children at risk for conduct problems.43, 44 An integrative review of 26 reviews and meta - analyses (1,075 studies) published between 1990 and 2008 found that PMT interventions had a larger effect size than either child focused or school / community based interventions (ds =.56,.41, and.28, respectively).45 If PMT can play a role in the prevention of conduct problems, that will have important implications for reducing the need for ongoing interventions throughout the developmental period and adulthood.

As previously reported, the pretreatment to post-treatment effect size on the primary outcome of health anxiety HAI was d = 1.8 in the ICBT group and d = 1.2 in the IBSM group, indicating that both treatments yielded large improvements in health anxiety.12 Mixed - effects models analysis showed that ICBT led to significantly larger reductions of health anxiety compared with IBSM (F = 3.9; df = 2, 121; p = 0.022; between - group d at post-treatment = 0.3).

The larger average effect was produced by between 20 and 25 % of the programs that had effect sizes larger than.5 (which is considered to represent a moderate - to - large effect).

A recent meta - analysis indicated a large effect size for the association between higher levels of self - compassion and lower levels of psychopathology (MacBeth and Gumley 2012).

According to the criteria of Cohen (1988) for small, moderate and large effect sizes, the strength of the association between attachment and delinquency should be considered small to moderate (r = 0.18).

The effect size estimation revealed large between - group program effects on Competence and Confidence and moderate effects on Character as well as moderate within - group time effects on all Five Cs.

Most importantly, it was demonstrated that the SCARED could differentiate between socially anxious and healthy Spanish adolescents as demonstrated by measurement invariance (χ 2 = 254.27, df = 1343, GFI =.884, AGFI =.872, RMR =.031) and the large effect size (η p 2 =.22) between the samples.

The comparison was carried out using the independent t - test and yielded a significant difference between the two groups (t = -3.021, p = 0.005) as well as a large effect size (Cohen's d = 0.99).