 A commentary on reporting effect size and confidence intervals: Response to Palmer and Strelan (2014)Sujay Dutta and Chris Pullig Journal of Business Research, 2015, vol. 68, issue 5, 1082-1085 Abstract: Based on recalculations of effect size (Cohen's d) and confidence intervals around these estimates (ES&CI), Palmer and Strelan (P&S; forthcoming) re-interpret some of the findings from our 2011 Journal of Business Research article (Dutta and Pullig 2011). In response, we critique two aspects of P&S's conclusions, the use of ES&CI in a dichotomous nature and the assumed superiority of the ES&CI approach. In addition, we discuss the implications of the ES&CI results for the substantive domain of our research and findings. Specifically, the ES&CI results do not “overturn” our conclusions, but indicate that for two variables our results should be considered tentative while for two variables the ES&CI approach leads to similar conclusions. We conclude with a discussion of the implications of the larger debate between reporting traditional null hypothesis statistical testing (NHST), ES&CI, or both in behavioral research in marketing and business-related disciplines. Keywords: Brand crises; Brand equity; Confidence intervals; Effect size; Hypothesis testing (search for similar items in EconPapers) Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:68:y:2015:i:5:p:1082-1085 DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.10.010 Access Statistics for this article Journal of Business Research is currently edited by A. G. Woodside More articles in Journal of Business Research from Elsevier |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.