How is it possible to get influential policy makers and practitioners to attend to the importance of the findings from meta-analyses? Several approaches that will help to ensure that meta-analytic results will have maximum impact are prescribed. It is recommended that easily understandable metrics such as Pearson's r be employed. Furthermore, it is suggested that null-hypothesis significance testing be abandoned and replaced by confidence intervals and common language statistics that clearly describe the preciseness and magnitude of results. Finally, brief comments on some meta-analytic issues are offered.
Abelson, R.P. (1985). A variance explanation paradox: When a little is a lot. Psychological Bulletin,97, 129-133.
2.
Alder, A.G., & Vollick, D. (2003). Undergraduate statistics in psychology: A survey of Canadian institutions. Canadian Psychology, 41, 149-151.
3.
Aloe, A.M., Becker, B.J., & Pigott, T. (2006, April). An alternative to R2 for assessing linear models of effect size. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
4.
Andrews, D.A. (1980). Some experimental investigations of the principles of differential association through deliberate manipulations of the structure of service systems. American Sociological Review, 45, 448-462.
5.
Andrews, D.A. (2006). Enhancing adherence to risk—need—responsivity: Making quality a matter of policy. Criminology and Public Policy, 5, 595-601.
6.
Andrews, D.A., & Bonta, J. (2003). The psychology of criminal conduct (3rd ed.). Cincinnati, OH: Anderson.
7.
Andrews, D.A., & Gendreau, P. (1976). Undergraduate training and correctional service . Professional Psychology, 7, 21-30.
8.
Andrews, D.A., Zinger, I., Hoge, R.D., Bonta, J., Gendreau, P., & Cullen, F.T. (1990). Does correctional treatment work: A clinically-relevant and psychologically-informed meta-analysis. Criminology, 28, 369-404.
9.
Beaman, A.L. (1991). An empirical comparison of meta-analytic and traditional reviews. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 252-257.
10.
Best, L. (2006). Effective graphical design. Unpublished manuscript , Department of Psychology, University of New Brunswick at St. John, New Brunswick, Canada.
11.
Blalock, H.M. (1979). Social statistics. New York : McGraw Hill.
12.
Bonta, J., Law, M., & Hanson, R.K. (1998). The prediction of criminal and violent recidivism among mentally disordered offenders: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin,123, 123-142.
13.
Brown, J.R. (2001). Who rules in science? An opinionated guide to the science wars. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
14.
Campbell, M.A., French, S., & Gendreau, P. (2007). Assessing the utility of risk assessment tools and personality measures in the prediction of violent recidivism for adult offenders. Unpublished manuscript, Centre for Criminal Justice Studies, University of New Brunswick at St. John, New Brunswick, Canada.
15.
Capraro, M.M., & Capraro, R.M. (2003). Exploring the APA Fifth Edition Publication Manual's impact on the analytic preferences of journal editorial board members. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 63, 554-565.
16.
Carey, R., & Lloyd, R. (2001). Measuring quality improvement in healthcare: A guide to statistical process control applications. Milwaukee, WI: ASQ Press.
17.
Carlson, K.D., & Schmidt, F.L. (1999). Impact of experimental design on effect size: Findings from the research literature on training. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 851-862.
18.
Carver, R.P. (1978). The case against statistical significance testing . Harvard Educational Review, 48, 378-399.
Cohen, M. (1994). The Earth is round (p < .05). American Psychologist, 49, 997-1003.
21.
Cohen, M. (1998). The monetary value of saving high-risk youth. Journal of QuantitativeCriminology, 14, 5-33.
22.
Cook, T.D., & Leviton, L.C. (1980). Reviewing the literature: A comparison of traditional methods with meta-analysis. Journal of Personality, 48, 449-472.
23.
Cooper, H. (1997). Appendix. In M. Hunt (Ed.), How science takes stock: The story of meta-analysis (pp. 169-182). New York: Russell Sage.
24.
Cooper, H., & Hedges, L.V. (1994). The handbook of research synthesis. New York: Russell Sage.
25.
Cullen, F.T. (2002). Rehabilitation and treatment programs. In J. Q. Wilson & J. Petersilia (Eds.), Crime and public policy (2nd ed., pp. 253-289). San Francisco: ICS Press.
26.
Cullen, F.T., & Gendreau, P. (1989). The effectiveness of correctional rehabilitation: Reconsidering the “nothing works” doctrine. In L. Goodstein & D. L. Mackenzie (Eds.), The American prison: Issues in research policy (pp. 23-44). New York: Plenum .
27.
Cullen, F.T., & Gendreau, P. (2001). From nothing works to what works: Changing professional ideology in the 21st century. Federal Probation, 66, 43-49.
Cumming, G., & Finch, S. (2005). Inference by eye: Confidence intervals and how to read pictures of data. American Psychologist, 60, 170-180.
30.
Davidson, W., Gottschalk, L., Gensheimer, L., & Mayer, J. (1984). Interventions with juvenile delinquents: A meta-analysis of treatment efficacy. Washington, DC: National Institute of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
31.
Day, A., Bryan, J., Davey, L., & Casey, S. (2006). Processes of change in offender rehabilitation. Psychology, Crime and Law, 12, 473-489.
32.
Durlak, J.A. (1995). Understanding meta-analysis. In L. A. Grimm & P. R. Yarnold (Eds.), Reading and understanding multivariate statistics (pp. 319-352). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
33.
Fidler, F. (2002). The fifth edition of the APA Publication Manual: Why its statistics recommendations are so controversial. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 61, 749-770.
34.
Fidler, F., Thomason, N., Cumming, G., Finch, S., & Leeman, J. (2004). Editors can lead researchers to confidence intervals but they can't make them think: Statistical reform lessons from medicine. Psychological Science, 15, 119-126.
35.
Fisher, R.A. (1956). Statistical methods and scientific inference. Edinburgh, Scotland: Oliver and Boyd.
36.
Fleiss, J.L. (1993). The statistical basis of meta-analysis. StatisticalMethods in Medical Research, 2, 121-145.
37.
Fleiss, J.L. (1994). Measures of effect size for categorical data. In H. Cooper & L. V. Hedges (Eds.), Handbook of research synthesis (pp. 245-260). New York: Russell Sage.
38.
Freedman, D., Pisani, R., Purves, R., & Adhikari, A. (1991). Statistics (2nd ed.). New York: Norton.
39.
French, S.A. (2007). Knowledge cumulation practices in experimental psychology: A study of the use of graphs, point estimates and confidence intervals. Unpublished manuscript, Department of Psychology, University of New Brunswick, St. John, New Brunswick, Canada.
40.
French, S.A., & Gendreau, P. (2006). Reducing prison misconducts: What works!Criminal Justice and Behavior, 20, 1-29.
41.
Gage, N.L. (1978). The scientific basis of the art of teaching. New York: Teachers College Press.
42.
Gardner, M. (2005). Are universes thicker than blackberries?New York: Norton.
43.
Garrett, C.J. (1985). Effects of residential treatment of adjudicated delinquents: A meta-analysis. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 22, 287-308.
44.
Gendreau, P. (1995). Technology transfer in the criminal justice field: Implications for substance abuse. In T. E. Backer, S. L. David, & G. Soucy (Eds.), Reviewing the behavioral science knowledge base on technology transfer ( NIDA Research Monograph No. 155, pp. 198-208 ). Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse.
45.
Gendreau, P. (1996a). The principles of effective intervention with offenders. In A. T. Harland (Ed.), Choosing correctional options that work: Defining the demand and evaluating the supply (pp. 117-130). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
46.
Gendreau, P. (1996b). The rehabilitation of offenders: What we know and what has to be done. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 23, 144-161.
47.
Gendreau, P. (2000). 1998 Margaret Mead award address: Rational policies for reforming offenders. In M. McMahon (Ed.), Assessment to assistance: Programs for women in community corrections (pp. 329-338). Lanham, MD: American Correctional Associations.
48.
Gendreau, P. (2002). We must do a better job of cumulating knowledge . Canadian Psychology, 43, 205-210.
49.
Gendreau, P. (2006). Where the field of criminal justice should be headed. Crime Scene, 13, 8-10.
50.
Gendreau, P., & Andrews, D.A. (1979). Psychological consultation in correctional agencies: Case studies and general issues. In J. J. Platt & R. W. Wicks (Eds.), The psychological consultant (pp. 177-212). New York: Grune & Stratton.
51.
Gendreau, P., & Andrews, D.A. (1990). Tertiary prevention: What the meta-analysis of the offender treatment literature tells us about “what works.” Canadian Journal of Criminology, 32, 173-184.
52.
Gendreau, P., & Andrews, D.A. (2001). Correctional Program Assessment Inventory (CPAI-2000) . St. John, Canada: University of New Brunswick.
53.
Gendreau, P., Freedman, N., Wilde, G.J.S., & Scott, G.D. (1972). Changes in EEG alpha frequency and evoked response latency during solitary confinement. Journal of Abnormal Psychology , 79, 54-59.
54.
Gendreau, P., Goggin, C., Cullen, F.T., & Paparozzi, M. (2002). The common sense revolution and correctional policy . In J. McGuire (Ed.), Offender rehabilitation and treatment: Effective programs and policies to reduce re-offending (pp. 360-386). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
55.
Gendreau, P., Goggin, C., French, S., & Smith, P. (2006). Practicing psychology in correctional settings: “What works” in reducing criminal behavior. In A. K. Hess & I. B. Weiner (Eds.), The handbook of forensic psychology (3rd ed., pp. 722-750). New York: John Wiley.
56.
Gendreau, P., Goggin, C., & Smith, P. (2000). Generating rational correctional policies: An introduction to advances in cumulating knowledge. CorrectionsManagement Quarterly, 4, 52-60.
57.
Gendreau, P., Goggin, C., & Smith, P. (2001). Implementation guidelines for correctional programs in the “real world.” In G. A. Bernfeld, D. P. Farrington, & A. W. Leschied (Eds.), Offender rehabilitation and practice (pp. 247-268). New York: John Wiley.
58.
Gendreau, P., Goggin, C., & Smith, P. (2002). Is the PCL-R really the “unparalleled” measure of offender risk?Criminal Justice and Behavior, 29, 397-426.
59.
Gendreau, P., Gupta, R., Smith, P., & Goggin, C. (2001). Catching up is hard to do: Fail safe statistics to overturn conclusions regarding their utility of prediction and treatment research. Unpublished manuscript, Department of Psychology , University of New Brunswick, St. John, New Brunswick, Canada.
60.
Gendreau, P., & Keyes, D. (2001). Making prisons safer and more humane environments . Canadian Journal of Criminology, 43, 123-130.
61.
Gendreau, P., Little, T., & Goggin, C. (1996). A meta-analysis of the predictors of adult offender recidivism: What works!Criminology, 31, 401-433.
62.
Gendreau, P., & Ross, R.R. (1979). Effective correctional treatment: Bibliotherapy for cynics. Crime and Delinquency, 25, 463-489.
63.
Gendreau, P., & Ross, R.R. (1987). Revivification of rehabilitation: Evidence from the 80's. Justice Quarterly, 4, 349-407.
64.
Gendreau, P., Smith, P., & French, S. (2006). The theory of effective correctional intervention: Empirical status and future direction. In F. Cullen, J. Wright, & M. Coleman (Eds.), Taking stock: The status of criminological theory (pp. 419-446) Piscataway, NJ: Transaction Press.
65.
Gendreau, P., & Suboski, M.D. (1971a). Classical discrimination eyelid conditioning in primary psychopaths. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 77, 282-286.
66.
Gendreau, P., & Suboski, M.D. (1971b). Age and IQ discrimination conditioning of the eyelid response. Journal of ExperimentalPsychology, 89, 379-382.
67.
Gigerenzer, G. (2004). Mindless statistics. Journal of Socio-Economics, 33, 587- 606.
68.
Glass, G.V. (1977). Integrated findings: The meta-analysis of research . Review of Research in Education, 5, 351-379.
69.
Gliner, J.A., Leech, N.L., & Morgan, G.A. (2002). Problems with null hypothesis significance testing (NHST): What do the textbooks say?Journal of Experimental Education, 71, 83-92.
70.
Gordon, K.H. (1924). Group judgments in the field of lifted weights. Journal of ExperimentalPsychology, 3, 398-400.
71.
Grissom, R.J. (1996). The magical number .7 + —.2: Meta-meta-analysis of the probability of superior outcome in comparisons involving, therapy, placebo and control. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology , 64, 973-982.
72.
Gross, P.R., & Levitt, N. (1994). Higher superstition: The academic left and its quarrels with science. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
73.
Haddock, C.K., Rindskopf, D., & Shadish, W.R. (1998). Using odds ratios as effect sizes for meta-analysis of dichotomous data: A primer on methods and issues. Psychological Methods, 3, 339-353.
74.
Hanson, R.K., & Broom, I. (2005). Utility of cumulative meta-analysis: Application to programs for reducing sexual violence. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 17, 357-373.
75.
Hanson, R.K., Gordon, A., Harris, A.J.R., Marques, J.K., Murphy, W., Quinsey, V.L., et al. (2002). First report of the Collaborative Outcome Data Project on the effectiveness of psychological treatment for sex offenders . Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 14, 169-174.
76.
Harlow, L. L., Mulaik, S. A., & Steiger, J. H. (Eds.). (1997). What if there were no significance tests?Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
77.
Hart, H. (1923). Predicting parole success. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 14, 405-413.
78.
Hedges, L.V. (1987). How hard is hard science, how soft is soft science: The empirical cumulativeness of research. American Psychologist , 42, 443-455.
79.
Hedges, L.V. (1994). Combining estimates across studies: Meta-analysis of research. In K. A. McCormick, S. R. Moore, & R. A. Siegel (Eds.), Clinical practice guideline development: Methodology perspectives (pp. 15-26). Washington, DC: Agency for Health Care Policy Research.
80.
Hedges, L.V. (1997). Improving meta-analysis for policy purposes. In W. J. Bukoski & N. S. Tobler (Eds.), Meta-analysis of drug abuse prevention programs (NIDA Research Monograph No. 170, pp. 202-217). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
81.
Hedges, L.V., & Olkin, I. (1985). Statistical methods for meta-analysis. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
82.
Hedges, L.V., & Vevea, J.L. (1998). Fixed and random effects models in meta-analysis . Psychological Method, 3, 486-504.
83.
Hemphill, J.F. (2003). Interpreting the magnitudes of correlation coefficients . American Psychologist, 58, 78-80.
84.
Howard, G.S. (1993). Is the scientific community ready to experiment with practice methodologies?Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 24, 237-244.
85.
Howard, G.S., Maxwell, S.E., & Young, K.J. (2000) The proof of the pudding: An illustration of the relative strengths of null hypothesis, Meta-analysis, and Bayesian analysis . Psychological Methods, 5, 315-332.
86.
Hsu, L.M. (2004). Biases of success rate differences shown in binomial effect size displays. Psychological Methods, 9, 183-197.
87.
Hubbard, R., & Ryan, P.A. (2000). The historical growth of statistical significance testing in psychology—and its future prospects. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60, 661-681.
88.
Hunt, M. (1997). How science takes stock: The story of meta-analysis . New York: Russell Sage.
89.
Hunt, M. (1999). The new know-nothings: The political foes of the scientific study of human nature. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Press.
90.
Hunter, J.E., & Schmidt, F.L. (1990). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
91.
Hunter, J.E., & Schmidt, F.L. (2000). Fixed effects vs. random effects meta-analysis models: Implications for cumulative knowledge. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 8, 275-292.
92.
Hunter, J.E., & Schmidt, F.L. (2004). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
93.
Keri, J. (2006). Baseball between the numbers. New York: Basic Books.
94.
Kirk, R.E. (1996). Practical significance: A concept whose time has come. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56, 746-759.
95.
Kline, R.B. (2004). Beyond significance testing: Reforming data analysis methods in behavioral research. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
96.
Koch, S. (1951). Theoretical psychology, 1950: An overview. Psychological Review, 58, 295-301.
97.
Krueger, J. (2001). Null hypothesis significance testing: On the survival of a flawed method. American Psychologist, 56, 15-26.
98.
Kuncel, N.R., Hezlett, S.A., & Ones, D.S. (2001). A comprehensive meta-analysis of the predictive validity of the graduate record examinations: Implications for graduate student selection and performance. Psychological Bulletin,127, 162-181.
99.
Landman, J.T., & Dawes, R.M. (1982). Psychotherapy outcome: Smith and Glass' conclusions stand up under scrutiny. American Psychologist, 37, 504-516.
100.
Latessa, E.J., Cullen, F.T., & Gendreau, P. (2002). Beyond correctional quackery: Professionalism and the possibility of effective treatment. Federal Probation , 66, 43-49.
101.
Latour, B. (1990). Drawing things together. In M. Lynch & S. Woolgar (Eds.), Representation in scientific practice (pp. 19-68). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
102.
Legge, G.E., Gru, Y., & Luebker, A. (1989). Efficacy of graphical perception. Perception & Psychophysics, 46, 365-374.
103.
Ley, B.A. (1972). Quantitative aspects of psychological assessment: An introduction. London: Duckworth .
104.
Lipsey, M.W. (2001). RE: Unsolved problems and unfinished business . American Journal of Evaluation, 22, 325-328.
105.
Lipsey, M.W., Chapman, G.L., & Landenberger, N.A. (2001). Cognitive—behavioral programs for offenders. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 578, 144-157.
106.
Lipsey, M.W., & Wilson, D.B. (1993). The efficacy of psychological, educational, and behavioral treatment: Confirmation from meta-analysis. American Psychologist, 48, 1181-1209.
Loftus, G.R. (1996). Psychology will be a much better science when we change the way we analyze data. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 5(6), 161-171.
109.
Lowenkamp, C.T., Latessa, E.J., & Smith, P. (2006). Does correctional program quality really matter? The impact of adhering to the principles of effective intervention. Criminology & Public Policy, 5, 575-594.
110.
Lynch, M. (1990). The externalized retina: Selection and mathematization in the visual documentation of objects in the life sciences. In M. Lynch & S. Woolgar (Eds.), Representation in scientific practice (pp. 1-18). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
111.
Maltz, M.D. (1994). Deviating from the mean: The declining significance of significance. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency , 31, 434-463.
112.
Martinson, R. (1974). What works?—Questions and answers about prison reform. The Public Interest, 35, 22-54.
113.
Martinson, R. (1979). New findings, new views: A note of caution regarding sentencing reform. Hofstra Law Review, 7, 243-258.
114.
McCartney, K., & Rosenthal, R. (2000). Effect size, practical importance, and social policy for children. Child Development, 71, 173-180.
115.
McCloskey, D. (2000). How to be human though an economist. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
116.
McGrath, R.E., & Meyer, G.J. (2006). When effect sizes disagree: The case of r and d. Psychological Methods, 11, 386-401.
117.
McGraw, K.O., & Wong, S.P. (1992). A common language effect size statistic. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 361-365.
118.
McGuire, J. (2004). Understanding psychology and crime: Perspectives on theory and action. Berkshire, UK: Open University Press .
119.
Meehl, P.E. (1978). Theoretical risks and tabular asterisks: Sir Karl, Sir Ronald, and the slow progress of soft psychology. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 46, 806-834.
120.
Meehl, P.E. (1987). The problem is epistemology, not statistics: Replace significance tests by confidence intervals and quantify accuracy of risky numerical predictions. In L. L. Harlow , S. A. Mulaik, & J. H. Steiger (Eds.), What if there were no significance tests? (pp. 393-425). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
121.
Morrison, D.E., & Henkel, R.E. (1970). The significance test controversy. Chicago: Aldine.
122.
Mossman, D. (1994). Assessing predictions of violence: Being accurate about accuracy. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology , 62, 783-792.
123.
Mulaik, S.A., Raju, N.S., & Harshman, R.A. (1997). There is a time and a place for significance testing. In L. L. Harlow , S. A. Mulaik, & J. H. Steiger (Eds.), What if there were no significance tests? (pp. 65-116). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
124.
National Research Council. (1992). Combining information: Statistical issues and opportunities for research. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
125.
Nesovic, A. (2003). Psychometric evaluation of the Correctional Program Assessment Inventory (CPAI). Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
126.
Neyman, J., & Pearson, E.S. (1928a). On the use and interpretation of certain test criteria for purposes of statistical inference: Part I. Biometrika , 20A, 175-240.
127.
Neyman, J., & Pearson, E.S. (1928b). On the use and interpretation of certain test criteria for purposes of statistical inference: Part II. Biometrika, 20A, 263-294.
128.
Oakes, M. (1986). Statistical inference: A commentary for the social and behavioural sciences. New York: John Wiley.
129.
Orwin, R.G. (1987). A fail-safe N for effect size in meta-analysis . Journal of Educational Statistics, 8, 157-159.
130.
Overton, R. (1998). A comparison of fixed-effects and mixed (random-effects) models for meta-analysis tests of moderator variable effects. Psychological Methods, 3, 354-379.
131.
Ozer, D.J. (1985). Correlation and the coefficient of determination . Psychological Bulletin,97, 307-315.
132.
Peterson, R.A., & Brown, S.P. (2005). On the use of beta-coefficients in meta-analysis . Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 75-181.
133.
Peto, R. (1987). Discussion. Statistics in Medicine , 6, 242.
134.
Popper, K. (1959). The logic of scientific discovery. London: Hutchison.
135.
Popper, K. (1983). Realism and the aim of science. Totowa, NJ: Rowman and Littlefield.
136.
Popper, K. (1986). Predicting overt behaviour versus predicting hidden states. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 9, 254-255.
137.
Posavac, E.J., & Carey, G.C. (2006). Program evaluation: Methods and case studies. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
138.
Rice, M.E., & Harris, G.T. (1995). Violent recidivism: Assessing predictive validity . Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 63, 737-748.
139.
Rice, M.E., & Harris, G.T. (2005). Comparing effect sizes in follow-up studies: ROC, Cohen's d and r. Law and Human Behavior, 29, 615-620.
140.
Robinson, W. (1950). Ecological correlations and the behaviour of individuals . American Sociological Review, 15, 351-357.
141.
Rosenthal, R. (1979). The “file drawer” problem and tolerance for negative results. Psychological Bulletin,86, 638-641.
142.
Rosenthal, R. (1991). Meta-analytic procedures for social research (Rev. ed.). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
143.
Rosenthal, R. (1995). Writing meta-analytic reviews. Psychological Bulletin,118, 183- 192.
144.
Rosenthal, R., & DiMatteo, M.R. (2001). Meta-analysis: Recent developments in quantitative methods for literature reviews. Annual Review ofPsychology, 52, 59-82.
145.
Rosenthal, R., Rosnow, R., & Rubin, D.B. (2000). Contrasts and effect sizes in behavioral research: A correlational approach. New York: Cambridge University Press.
146.
Rosenthal, R., & Rubin, D.B. (1979). A note on percent variance explained as a measure of the importance of effects. Journal of Applied Social Psychology , 9, 395-396.
147.
Ross, R., & Gendreau, P. (1980). Effective correctional treatment. Toronto, Canada : Butterworths.
148.
Scarr, S. (1997). Rules of evidence: A larger context for the statistical debate. Psychological Science, 8, 16-20.
149.
Schmidt, F.L. (1992). What do data really mean? Research findings, meta-analysis, and cumulative knowledge in psychology. American Psychologist , 47, 1173-1181.
150.
Schmidt, F.L. (1996). Statistical significance testing and cumulative knowledge in psychology: Implications for the training of researchers. Psychological Methods, 1, 115-129.
151.
Schmidt, F., & Hunter, J. (1997). Eight common but false objections to the discontinuation of significance testing in the analysis of research data. In L. Harlow, S. Muliak, & J. Steiger (Eds.), What if there were no significance tests? (pp. 37-64). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
152.
Schmidt, F.L., & Hunter, J. (2002). Are there benefits to null hypothesis significance testing?American Psychologist, 57, 65-66.
153.
Schwarz, A. (2004). The numbers game: Baseball's lifetime fascination with statistics. New York: St. Martin's .
154.
Sedlmeier, P., & Grigenzer, G. (1989). Do studies of statistical power have an effect on the power of studies?Psychological Bulletin,105, 309-316.
155.
Shadish, W.R., & Haddock, C.K. (1994). Combining estimates of effect size. In H. L. Cooper & L. V. Hedges (Eds.), Handbook of research synthesis (pp. 261-282). New York: Russell Sage.
156.
Shewhart, W.A. (1931). Economic control of quality of manufactured product . Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand.
157.
Smith, A.F.M. (1996). Mad cows and ecstasy: Chance or chaos in an evidence based society?Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 159, 367-383.
158.
Smith, L.D., Best, L.A., Cylke, V.A., & Stubbs, D.A. (2000). Psychology without p values. Data analysis at the turn of the 19th century. American Psychologist, 55, 260-263.
159.
Smith, L.D., Best, L.A., Stubbs, A., Bastiani, A.B., & Robertson-Nay, R. (2002). Constructing knowledge: The role of graphs and tables in hard and soft psychology. American Psychologist, 57, 749-761.
160.
Smith, M.L., & Glass, G.V. (1977). Meta-analysis of psychotherapy outcomes. American Psychologist, 32, 752-760.
161.
Smith, P., & Gendreau, P. (2006). The effects of incarceration on recidivism: A longitudinal examination of program participation and institutional adjustment in federally sentenced adult male offenders. Unpublished doctoral dissertation , University of New Brunswick, St. John, New Brunswick, Canada.
162.
Smith, P., Goggin, C., & Gendreau, P. (2002). The effects of prison sentences and intermediate sanctions on recidivism: General effects and individual differences. (User Report 2002-01). Ottawa: Solicitor General Canada.
163.
Smithson, M. (2003). Confidence intervals. Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences Series, No. 140. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
164.
Snook, B., Eastwood, J., Gendreau, P., Goggin, C., & Cullen, F.T. (2007). Taking stock of criminal profiling: A narrative review and meta-analysis. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34, 437-453.
165.
Thompson, B. (1999). Why encouraging effect size is not working: The etiology of researcher resistance to changing practices. Journal of Psychology, 133, 133-140.
166.
Thompson, B. (2002). What future quantitative social science research could look like: Confidence intervals for effect sizes. Educational Researcher, 31, 25-32.
167.
Tilton, J.W. (1937). The measurement of overlapping. Journal of Educational Psychology, 28, 656-662.
168.
Tufte, E.R. (1983). The visual display of quantitative information . Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press.
169.
Vacha-Hasse, T., & Ness, C.M. (1999). Statistical significance testing as it relates to practice: Use within professional psychology. Professional Psychology: Research & Practice, 30, 104-105.
170.
Wilkinson, L. (with the Task Force on Statistical Inference, APA Board of Scientific Affairs). (1999). Statistical methods in psychology journals: Guidelines and explanations. American Psychologist, 54, 594-604.
171.
Wilson, D.B. (2001). Meta-analytic methods for criminology. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 578, 71-89.
172.
Wilson, D.B., Gallagher, C.A., & MacKenzie, D.L. (2000). A meta-analysis of corrections-based education, vocation, and work programs for adult offenders. Journal on Research in Crime and Delinquency, 37, 347-368.
173.
Wortley, R. (2002). Situational prison control: Crime prevention in correctional institutions. New York: Cambridge University Press.
