Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Article reviews statistical, practical, and clinical significance types in counseling, highlighting reporting expectations.
The present article reviews and distinguishes 3 related but different types of significance: “statistical,” “practical,” and “clinical.” A framework for conceptualizing the many “practical” effect size indices is described. Several effect size indices that counseling researchers can use, or that counselors reading the literature may encounter, are summarized. A way of estimating “corrected” intervention effects is proposed. It is suggested that readers should expect authors to report indices of “practical” or “clinical” significance, or both, within their research reports; and it is noted that indeed some journals now require such reports.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bruce Thompson (2002) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: