Sentence examples for trivial effect size from inspiring English sources

An even more trivial effect size was computed for the wholist-verbalisers and analytic-imagers (d = 0.02 and d = 0.01 respectively).

If we set the mean effect size of missing studies at.001 and define the threshold for a "trivial" effect size to be.01, then the Orwin Fail-Safe N for our database is 544 studies.

Yet only one pairing produced a statistically significant difference between mean values (RER at 120 W) after Holm Bonferonni adjustment; but the small APE and CV for this pair of 0.8 and 0.6 %, respectively, and a trivial effect size (0.16) all confirmed this was a physiologically insignificant difference.

The few statistically significant differences detected between the duplicate systems were considered to have small or trivial effect sizes and their magnitudes to be of little physiological importance.

The few statistically significant differences detected between the two duplicate systems were determined to have small or trivial effect sizes, and their magnitudes to be of little physiological importance.

However, the CI included 1.0, and the effect size was trivial (1.01).

In addition, the VAS could distinguish IDU and non-IDU patients at a level of significance p=0.09; however, the effect size was trivial.

The number of unretrieved experiments averaging a null effect that would be required to reduce the effect size to a trivial level was conservatively calculated to be 87 (Mossbridge et al., 2012; see also, Mossbridge et al., 2014).

To analyse the usefulness, the Effect Size (ES) ratio = "Trivial" for all variables (for 1 day and 1 week) and the Smallest Worthwhile Change (SWC) ratio (Typical Error (TE)< SWC) = "GOOD" for k and ku (1 day and 1 week) were considered.

Cohen's d (standardized mean difference) was calculated for the between-group effect size for each muscle (trivial: d < 0.2, small: 0.2 ≤ d < 0.5, moderate: 0.5 ≤ d < 0.8, large: d ≥ 0.8).

The following criteria were used: ES <0.2 was classified as trivial, ES = 0.2 0.49 was considered as "small" effect size; ES = 0.5 0.79 represented a "medium" effect size; and ES >0.8 represented a "large" effect size.