Paper detail

The Least Difference in Means: A Statistic for Effect Size Strength and Practical Significance

With limited resources, scientific inquiries must be prioritized for further study, funding, and translation based on their practical significance: whether the effect size is large enough to be meaningful in the real world. Doing so must evaluate a result's effect strength, defined as a conservative assessment of practical significance. We propose the least difference in means ($δ_L$) as a two-sample statistic that can quantify effect strength and perform a hypothesis test to determine if a result has a meaningful effect size. To facilitate consensus, $δ_L$ allows scientists to compare effect strength between related results and choose different thresholds for hypothesis testing without recalculation. Both $δ_L$ and the relative $δ_L$ outperform other candidate statistics in identifying results with higher effect strength. We use real data to demonstrate how the relative $δ_L$ compares effect strength across broadly related experiments. The relative $δ_L$ can prioritize research based on the strength of their results.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.