The standardized mean difference (sometimes called Cohen’s d) is an effect size measure widely used to describe the outcomes of experiments. It is mathematically natural to describe differences between groups of data that are normally distributed with different means but the same standard deviation. In that context, it can be interpreted as determining several indexes of overlap between the two distributions. If the data are not approximately normally distributed or if they have substantially unequal standard deviations, the relation between d and overlap between distributions can be very different, and interpretations of d that apply when the data are normal with equal variances are unreliable.
BrydgesC. R. (2019). Effect size guidelines, sample size calculations, and statistical power in gerontology. Innovation in Aging, 3, 1–8.
2.
CherubiniJ. M.MacDonaldM. J. (2021). Statistical inferences using effect sizes in human endothelial function research. Artery Research, 27, 176–185.
3.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum.
4.
CooperH.HedgesL. V.ValentineJ. C. (Eds.) (2019). The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis (3rd ed.). The Russell Sage Foundation.
5.
HedgesL. V. (1981). Distribution theory for Glass’s estimator of effect size and related estimators. Journal of Educational Statistics, 6, 107–128.
6.
HedgesL. V.OlkinI. (1984). Nonparametric estimators of effect size in meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 96, 573–580.
7.
HedgesL. V.OlkinI. (1985). Statistical methods for meta-analysis. Academic Press.
8.
HedgesL. V.OlkinI. (2016). Overlap between treatment and control group distributions of an experiment as an effect size measure. Psychological Methods, 21, 61–68.
9.
HemphillJ. F. (2003). Interpreting the magnitude of correlation coefficients. American Psychologist, 58, 78–79.
10.
KraemerH. C.AndrewsG. (1982). A non-parametric technique for meta-analytic effect size calculation. Psychological Bulletin, 91, 404–412.
11.
KruegerA. (1999). Experimental estimates of education production functions. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114, 497–531.
12.
MahalanobisP. C. (1936). On the generalisze distance in statistics. Proceedings of the National Institute of Science of India, 2, 49–55.
13.
McGrawK. O.WongS. P. (1992). A common language effect size statistic. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 361–365.
14.
ParkerR. I.BrossartD. F.VannestK. J.LongJ. R.De-AbbaG. G.BaughF. G.SullivanJ. R. (2005). Effect sizes in single case research: How large is large?School Psychology Review, 34, 116–132.
15.
SarhanA. S.GreenbergB. G. (1962). Contributions to order statistics. John Wiley & Sons.
16.
TiltonJ. W. (1937). The measurement of overlapping. Journal of Educational Psychology, 289(9), 656–662.
17.
TukeyJ. W. (1977). Exploratory data analysis. Addison-Wesley.
WilkinsonL., & The Task Force on Statistical Inference. (1999). Statistical methods in psychology journals: Guidelines and explanations. American Psychologist, 54, 594–604. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.54.8.594
