REFERENCES
- Atkinson, D.R., Furlong, M.J., & Wampold, B.E. (1982). Statistical significance, reviewer evaluations, and the scientific process: Is there a (statistically) significant relationship? Journal of Counseling Psychology, 29, 189–194.
- Carver, R.P. (1978). The case against statistical significance testing. Harvard Educational Review, 48, 378–399.
- Cohen, J. (1977). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (rev. ed.). New York: Academic Press.
- Cohen, L.H. (1979). Clinical psychologists' judgments of the scientific merit and clinical relevance of psychotherapy outcome research. Journal of Consulting and Cinical Psychology, 47, 421–423.
- Craig, J.R., Eison, C.L., & Metze, L.P. (1976). Significance tests and their interpretations: An example utilizing published research and omega-squared. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 7, 280–281.
- Cronbach, L.J. (1975). Beyond the two disciplines of psychology. American Psychologist, 30, 116–127.
- Dar, R. (1987). Another look at Meehl, Lakatos, and the scientific practices of psychologists. American Psychologist, 42, 145–151.
- Greenwald, A.G. (1975). Consequences of the prejudice against the null hypothesis. Psychological Bulletin, 82, 1–20.
- Kerlinger, F.N. (1986). Foundations of behavioral research (3rd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
- Lakatos, I. (1976). Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programs. In J. Worrall & G. Currie (Eds.), The methodology of scientific research programs: Irme Lakatos philosophical papers (Vol. 1, pp. 8–101). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
- Schneider, A.L., & Darcy, R.E. (1984). Policy implications of using significance tests in evaluation research. Evaluation Review, 8, 573–582.
- Shaver, J.P. (1985). Chance and nonsense. Phi Delta Kappan, 67(1), 57–60.