Magnitudes of Experimental Effects in Social Science Research

How the magnitude of an experimental effect may be measured has been a matter of concern for at least two decades. The phenomenon of effect size is still not well under stood, and it cannot be inferred from statistical significance. In recent years various ways of assessing the amount of variance accounted for have been proposed as measures of magnitude of effect. Other writers have proposed rulesfor standardizing effect size, with the interpretations of the measures depending largely on intuitions buttressed by some further general empirical norms. All the methods of assessing effect size have serious flaws that limit their usefulness. The various statistical procedures for estimating variance accounted for are based on different statistical models and can produce rather sharply differing results, depending on the model employed. All the methods suffer from the limitation that they reflect to too great an extent the particular characteristics of the study being reported and hence have limited generalizability.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/67520/2/10.1177_0193841X8200600501.pd

Alluvial Sedimentation and Erosion in an Urbanizing Watershed,Gwynn Falls, Maryland

Earlier measurements of stream channel geometry on 19 reaches were repeated to provide a longitudinal study of stream channel adjustment over 13 years (1987-2000) in the urbanizing Gwynns Falls, Maryland watershed. We observed both enlargement and reduction in channel size, depending on the extent of upstream development, the timing and location of urbanization and upstream channel adjustment, and the presence of hydrologic constrictions and grade controls. Based on a relatively simple visual assessment of the composition, size, and extent of instream sediment storage, we categorized stream reaches into three phases: aggraded (7 sites), early erosion (7 sites), and late erosion (5 sites). Aggraded sites had point and lateral bars mantled with fine-grained sediment and experienced some reduction in cross-sectional area, primarily through the deposition of fine-grained material on bars in the channel margins. Early erosion sites had smaller bars and increases in channel cross-sectional area as a consequence of the evacuation of in-channel fine-grained sediment. Fine-grained sediments were either entirely absent or found only at a few high bar elevations at late erosion sites. Sediment evacuation from late erosion sites has both enlarged and simplified channels, as demonstrated by an increase in cross-sectional area and a strong decrease in channel width variation. Channel cross-sectional area enlargement, reduced channel width variation, and channel incision were ubiquitous at erosion sites. As a result, overbank flows were less common in the erosion sites as determined by high water marks left by a 2-year flood that occurred during the study period. Principal causes for channel changes appear to be increased high flow durations and reduced sediment supply. Spatial variation in channel conditions could not be tied simply to sub-basin impervious cover or watershed area. In-channel sediment storage is a useful indicator of channel form and adjustment. When combined with information on development and sedimentation conditions in the contributing drainage, instream sediment storage can be used to effectively assess future channel adjustments