Comparing Effect Sizes in Follow-Up Studies: ROC Area, Cohen's d, and r
- 913 Downloads
In order to facilitate comparisons across follow-up studies that have used different measures of effect size, we provide a table of effect size equivalencies for the three most common measures: ROC area (AUC), Cohen's d, and r. We outline why AUC is the preferred measure of predictive or diagnostic accuracy in forensic psychology or psychiatry, and we urge researchers and practitioners to use numbers rather than verbal labels to characterize effect sizes.
Key Wordseffect size ROC area risk assessment predictive accuracy
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Cohen, J. (1969). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
- Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Harris, G. T., & Rice, M. E. (2003). Actuarial assessment of risk among sex offenders. In R. A. Prentky, E. S. Janus, & M. C. Seto (Eds.), Understanding and managing sexually coercive behavior, Vol. 989 (pp. 198–210). New York: Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
- Hilton, N. Z., Carter, A. M., Harris, G. T., & Bryans, A. (2005). Using categorical judgments to communicate risk of violence. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
- Pearson, E. S., & Hartley, H. O. (Eds.). (1954). Biometrika tables for statisticians, Vol. 1 (1st ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Rosenthal, R. (1991). Meta-analytic procedures for social research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar