Abstract
Loftus’s (1993b, 1995) recommendation that investigators routinely include plots of appropriate means along with 95% confidence intervals or some other indication of variability has considerable merit, yet we agree with Morrison and Weaver (1995) that such plots can supplement but not supplant the usual reporting of analysis of variance results. Providing them may be easier than Loftus and Masson (1994) indicated, especially when error bars are understood as supplemental descriptive devices. We suggest a general, unified approach that applies to the explication of both between- and within-subjects effects. Variability is estimated separately for each group of scores identified as different by analysis because this serves description better. Raw scores are used for between-subjects effects, scores adjusted for between-subjects variability for within-subjects effects. All computations and figures are easily effected using common spreadsheet programs.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bakeman, R. (1992).Understanding social science statistics: A spreadsheet approach. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Cohen, J. (1968). Multiple regression as a general data-analytic system.Psychological Bulletin,70, 426–443.
Cohen, J. (1990). Things I have learned (so far).American Psychologist,45, 1304–1312.
Cohen, J., &Cohen, P. (1983).Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Edgington, E. S. (1987).Randomization tests. New York: Marcel Dekker.
Fisher, R. A. (1970).Statistical methods for research workers (14th ed.). Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd. (Original work published 1925)
Good, P. (1994).Permutation tests: A practical guide to resampling methods for testing hypotheses. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Greenhouse, S. W., &Geisser, S. (1959). On methods in the analysis of profile data.Psychometrika,24, 95–112.
Hays, W. L. (1963).Statistics. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Hochberg, Y., &Tamhane, A. C. (1987).Multiple comparison procedures. New York: Wiley.
Keppel, G. (1991).Design and analysis: A researcher’s handbook (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Kirk, R. E. (1982).Experimental design: Procedures for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Loftus, G. R. (1991). On the tyranny of hypothesis testing in the social sciences.Contemporary Psychology,36, 102–105.
Loftus, G. R. (1993a). Editorial comment.Memory & Cognition,21, 1–3.
Loftus, G. R. (1993b). A picture is worth a thousandp values: On the irrelevance of hypothesis testing in the microcomputer age.Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers,25, 250–256.
Loftus, G. R. (1995). Data analysis as insight: Reply to Morrison and Weaver.Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers,27, 57–59.
Loftus, G. R., &Masson, M. E. J. (1994). Using confidence intervals in within-subject designs.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,1, 476–490.
Morrison, G. R., &Weaver, B. (1995). Exactly how manyp values is a picture worth? A commentary on Loftus’s plot-plus-error-bar approach.Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers,27, 52–56.
Rosnow, R. L., &Rosenthal, R. (1989). Statistical procedures and the justification of knowledge in psychological science.American Psychologist,44, 1276–1284.
Tukey, J. W. (1977).Exploratory data analysis. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Turkheimer, M., Bakeman, R., &Adamson, L. B. (1989). Do mothers support and peers inhibit skilled object play in infancy?Infant Behavior & Development,12, 37–44.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
We would like to thank C. Chin and C. Davis, graduate students at Georgia State University, whose questions in class first caused us to consider these issues more closely, and D. Borkman Reed for her helpful editorial comments.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bakeman, R., Mcarthur, D. Picturing repeated measures: Comments on Loftus, Morrison, and others. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers 28, 584–589 (1996). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03200546
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03200546