The dodo bird verdict is alive and well--mostly.

Lester Luborsky(California University of Pennsylvania), Robert Rosenthal(University of California System), Louis Diguer(Université Laval), Tomasz P. Andrusyna(California University of Pennsylvania), Jeffrey S. Berman(University of Memphis), Jill T. Levitt, David A. Seligman(Industrial Measurement Systems (United States)), Elizabeth D. Krause(Duke University)
Clinical Psychology Science and Practice
January 1, 2002
Cited by 485

Abstract

We examined 17 meta-analyses of comparisons of active treatments with each other, in contrast to the more usual comparisons of active treatments with controls. These meta-analyses yielded a mean uncorrected absolute effect size for Cohen's d of .20, which is small and non-significant (an equivalent Pearson's r would be. 10). The smallness of this effect size confirms Rosenzweig's supposition in 1936 about the likely results of such comparisons. In the present sample, when such differences were corrected for the therapeutic allegiance of the researchers involved in comparing the different psychotherapies, these differences tend to become even further reduced in size and significance, as shown previously by Luborsky, Diguer, Seligman, et al. (1999).


Related Papers

No related papers found

Powered by citation graph analysis