Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Comment
  • Published:

Effect sizes and what to make of them

We all care about effect sizes. Yet, traditional ways of evaluating them (P < 0.05 and generic benchmarks) are failing us. We propose two paths forward: setting better, contextualized benchmarks or — more radically — letting go of benchmarks altogether. Both paths point to adjusted expectations, more detailed reporting and slow science.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout


  1. Yarkoni, T. & Westfall, J. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 12, 1100–1122 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Götz, F. M., Gosling, S. D. & Rentfrow, P. J. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 17, 205–215 (2022).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Paluck, E. L. & Cialdini, R. B. in Handbook of Research Methods in Social and Personality Psychology (eds Reis, H. T. & Judd, C. M.) 81–97 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2014).

  4. Jolly, E. & Chang, L. J. Top. Cogn. Sci. 11, 433–454 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Bakker, A. et al. Educ. Stud. Math. 102, 1–8 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Stokes, D. E. Pasteur’s Quadrant: Basic Science and Technological Innovation (Brookings Institution Press, 1997).

  7. Cohen, J. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 1, 98–101 (1992).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Funder, D. C. & Ozer, D. J. Adv. Methods Pract. Psychol. Sci. 2, 156–168 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Grice, J. W. et al. Adv. Methods Pract. Psychol. Sci. 3, 443–455 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Anvari, F. et al. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 18, 503–507 (2023).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Bartoš, F. et al. R. Soc. Open Sci. 10, 230224 (2023).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Fechner, G. T. Elemente der Psychophysik [Elements of Psychophysics] (Breitkopf und Härtel, 1860).

  13. Simonsohn, U. et al. Nat. Hum. Behav. 4, 1208–1214 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Nat. Hum. Behav. 5, 175 (2021).

  15. Frith, U. Trends Cogn. Sci. 24, 1–2 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to Friedrich M. Götz.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer reviewer information

Nature Human Behaviour thanks David Funder and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Götz, F.M., Gosling, S.D. & Rentfrow, P.J. Effect sizes and what to make of them. Nat Hum Behav 8, 798–800 (2024).

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI:


Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing