ReviewMilitary psychology : the official journal of the Division of Military Psychology, American Psychological Association2022
Correction for range restriction: Lessons from 20 research scenarios.
Review in Military psychology : the official journal of the Division of Military Psychology, American Psychological Association, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Declining trends in adolescent alcohol consumption and related harms: No room for complacency (an empirical reply to Vieira et al. 2025).Addiction (Abingdon, England) · 2026Article
- Article
- Respiratory effort burden measured by mandibular jaw movements as a digital marker with clinical insights in obstructive sleep apnea.Communications medicine · 2026Article
- Associations between perceived physical literacy and physical fitness tests among the adult population.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2026Article
- Information sampling and Bayesian belief formation in statistical judgment.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- Predictive validity of admission tests and educational attainment on preclinical academic performance - a multisite study.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Process-based measures in high-stakes testing: practical implications for construct validity within military aviation selection.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2025Article
- Article
- Portraits in Misery: A Bottom-Up-to-Prototype Approach to Personality Assessment.Journal of personality assessmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Data are often available only for recruits, a range-restricted sample. This creates the potential for mistaken inferences and poor decisions. This is because inferences and decisions are about the population, not the sample. Despite these problems, researchers must try to determine statistical values as if the sample was not range-restricted. Although range restriction correction methods have been available for over a century, often they are not applied or are applied incorrectly. Technical psychometric discussions of range restriction have not improved researcher practice. As an alternative, realistic scenarios are presented to illustrate and explain the consequences of (1) failing to correct correlations, (2) using the wrong correction formula, (3) correcting when information about previous selection variables is unavailable, (4) using an inappropriate unrestricted sample, (5) incorrectly computing the confidence interval for corrected correlations, and (6) interpretation of results. Although there are situations under which correction has little effect, correction still provides better estimates of relations among variables. It also improves theoretical understanding and interpretation of real-world results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.