ReviewBehavior research methods2026
Reliability and statistical power: Conceptual background and practical implications.
Review in Behavior research methods, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the behavioral sciences, robust phenomena having large effect sizes and related statistical power may be unreliable. This relation is in contrast to the view that both statistical power and reliability depend similarly on measurement error. In this view, robust but unreliable phenomena can be considered as a reliability paradox. The mathematical relation and possible independence of statistical power and reliability have been discussed in the statistical literature for decades. A common misconception related to the relationship between statistical power and reliability is that absolute reliability (measurement error) is often confounded with relative reliability (ratio of the true score variance to the total score variance). The present work reviews and discusses how measurement error and individual differences influence the relative reliability and robustness of a phenomenon. It discusses why relative reliability and robustness are partly related and why they are generally independent. Following these considerations, it summarizes how measurement error and group heterogeneity can be potentially manipulated to optimize the reliability and robustness of a measured phenomenon.
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.