Testing the Magnitude of Correlations Across Experimental Conditions

Correlation coefficients are often compared to investigate data across multiple research fields, as they allow investigators to determine different degrees of correlation to independent variables. Even with adequate sample size, such differences may be minor but still scientifically relevant. To dat...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Simone Di Plinio
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-05-01
Series:Frontiers in Psychology
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.860213/full
_version_ 1818549921065730048
author Simone Di Plinio
author_facet Simone Di Plinio
author_sort Simone Di Plinio
collection DOAJ
description Correlation coefficients are often compared to investigate data across multiple research fields, as they allow investigators to determine different degrees of correlation to independent variables. Even with adequate sample size, such differences may be minor but still scientifically relevant. To date, although much effort has gone into developing methods for estimating differences across correlation coefficients, adequate tools for variable sample sizes and correlational strengths have yet to be tested. The present study evaluated four different methods for detecting the difference between two correlations and tested the adequacy of each method using simulations with multiple data structures. The methods tested were Cohen’s q, Fisher’s method, linear mixed-effects models (LMEM), and an ad hoc developed procedure that integrates bootstrap and effect size estimation. Correlation strengths and sample size was varied across a wide range of simulations to test the power of the methods to reject the null hypothesis (i.e., the two correlations are equal). Results showed that Fisher’s method and the LMEM failed to reject the null hypothesis even in the presence of relevant differences between correlations and that Cohen’s method was not sensitive to the data structure. Bootstrap followed by effect size estimation resulted in a fair, unbiased compromise for estimating quantitative differences between statistical associations and producing outputs that could be easily compared across studies. This unbiased method is easily implementable in MatLab through the bootes function, which was made available online by the author at MathWorks.
first_indexed 2024-12-12T08:39:34Z
format Article
id doaj.art-478f1c5eaf1b44df85b30d9388c73c43
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1664-1078
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-12T08:39:34Z
publishDate 2022-05-01
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format Article
series Frontiers in Psychology
spelling doaj.art-478f1c5eaf1b44df85b30d9388c73c432022-12-22T00:30:50ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Psychology1664-10782022-05-011310.3389/fpsyg.2022.860213860213Testing the Magnitude of Correlations Across Experimental ConditionsSimone Di PlinioCorrelation coefficients are often compared to investigate data across multiple research fields, as they allow investigators to determine different degrees of correlation to independent variables. Even with adequate sample size, such differences may be minor but still scientifically relevant. To date, although much effort has gone into developing methods for estimating differences across correlation coefficients, adequate tools for variable sample sizes and correlational strengths have yet to be tested. The present study evaluated four different methods for detecting the difference between two correlations and tested the adequacy of each method using simulations with multiple data structures. The methods tested were Cohen’s q, Fisher’s method, linear mixed-effects models (LMEM), and an ad hoc developed procedure that integrates bootstrap and effect size estimation. Correlation strengths and sample size was varied across a wide range of simulations to test the power of the methods to reject the null hypothesis (i.e., the two correlations are equal). Results showed that Fisher’s method and the LMEM failed to reject the null hypothesis even in the presence of relevant differences between correlations and that Cohen’s method was not sensitive to the data structure. Bootstrap followed by effect size estimation resulted in a fair, unbiased compromise for estimating quantitative differences between statistical associations and producing outputs that could be easily compared across studies. This unbiased method is easily implementable in MatLab through the bootes function, which was made available online by the author at MathWorks.https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.860213/fullcorrelationbootstrapeffect sizep-valuemixed-effectssample size
spellingShingle Simone Di Plinio
Testing the Magnitude of Correlations Across Experimental Conditions
Frontiers in Psychology
correlation
bootstrap
effect size
p-value
mixed-effects
sample size
title Testing the Magnitude of Correlations Across Experimental Conditions
title_full Testing the Magnitude of Correlations Across Experimental Conditions
title_fullStr Testing the Magnitude of Correlations Across Experimental Conditions
title_full_unstemmed Testing the Magnitude of Correlations Across Experimental Conditions
title_short Testing the Magnitude of Correlations Across Experimental Conditions
title_sort testing the magnitude of correlations across experimental conditions
topic correlation
bootstrap
effect size
p-value
mixed-effects
sample size
url https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.860213/full
work_keys_str_mv AT simonediplinio testingthemagnitudeofcorrelationsacrossexperimentalconditions