» Articles » PMID: 30358698

Effect Sizes for Paired Data Should Use the Change Score Variability Rather Than the Pre-test Variability

Overview
Specialty Physiology
Date 2018 Oct 26
PMID 30358698
Citations 33
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Dankel, SJ and Loenneke, JP. Effect sizes for paired data should use the change score variability rather than the pre-test variability. J Strength Cond Res 35(6): 1773-1778, 2021-Effect sizes provide a universal statistic detailing the magnitude of an effect while removing the influence of the sample size. Effect sizes and statistical tests are closely related with the exception that the effect size illustrates the magnitude of an effect in SD units, whereas the test statistic illustrates the magnitude of effect in SE units. Avoiding statistical jargon, we illustrate why calculations of effect sizes on paired data within the sports and exercise science literature are repeatedly performed incorrectly using the variability of the study sample as opposed to the variability of the actual intervention. Statistics and examples are provided to illustrate why effect sizes are being calculated incorrectly. The calculation of effect sizes when examining paired data supports the results of the test statistic, but only when the effect size calculation is made relative to the variability of the intervention (i.e., the change score SD) because this is what is used for the calculation of the test statistic. Effect size calculations that are made on paired data should be made relative to the SD of the change score because this provides the information of the statistical test while removing the influence of the sample size. After all, we are interested in how variable the intervention is rather than how variable the sample population is. Effect size calculations that are made on pre-test/post-test designs should be calculated as the change score divided by the SD of the change score.

Citing Articles

Effects of mental fatigue on isometric mid-thigh pull performance and muscle activities.

Yang H, Atkins L, James C PLoS One. 2025; 20(3):e0318238.

PMID: 40073007 PMC: 11902280. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0318238.


Acute effects of isolated and combined dietary nitrate and caffeine ingestion on ergometer-based 1000 m time trial performance in highly trained kayakers.

Pollex J, Behrens M, Mittlmeier T, Bruhn S, Weippert M J Int Soc Sports Nutr. 2025; 22(1):2459095.

PMID: 39967381 PMC: 11841103. DOI: 10.1080/15502783.2025.2459095.


Comparison of Muscle Growth and Dynamic Strength Adaptations Induced by Unilateral and Bilateral Resistance Training: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Kassiano W, Nunes J, Costa B, Ribeiro A, Loenneke J, Cyrino E Sports Med. 2025; .

PMID: 39794667 DOI: 10.1007/s40279-024-02169-z.


Sex Differences in Neuromuscular Adaptations Following 12 Weeks of Kettlebell Swing Training.

Santos Junior E, de Salles B, Dias I, Simao R, Willardson J Cureus. 2024; 16(9):e70551.

PMID: 39479133 PMC: 11524543. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.70551.


Remote Evidence-Based Programs for Health Promotion to Support Older Adults During the COVID-19 Pandemic and Beyond: Mixed Methods Outcome Evaluation.

Steinman L, Chadwick K, Chavez Santos E, Sravanam S, Johnson S, Rensema E JMIR Aging. 2024; 7:e52069.

PMID: 38869932 PMC: 11211707. DOI: 10.2196/52069.