And our value of 0.1, or -0.1 is small, a value of 0.3 or

-0.3 is medium and 0.5 or -0.5 is large.

Calls in D which tells you the size of the difference between groups

doesn't have the same limitation in range as R.

The calls in D of 0.2or -0.2 are small 0.5 or

-0.5 is medium, and 0.8 or -0.8 is large.

But D can be over 1.

So I know I'm throwing a lot of numerical values at you, so

let's actually look at an example.

Here's a table from the True Grit article.

This table is showing the correlation or relationship based task where we

looked at how grit was correlated with many other variables.

If you look across the first row in the table you'll see the values reported for

the relationship between grit and all other variables we tested.

The values represented here are the Pearson's correlation coefficient, or

that r value I told you about so what you'll see is that most of

the correlations are very small with R values of 0.02, .16, and 0.808.

The one exception is the relationship between Grit and

Leadership which has an R value of .36.

Now, remember our rule of 0.01, 0.03, and 0.05.

This means that there's a moderate positive relationship between Grit and

Leadership such that greedier teachers also had higher leadership scores.

The second thing you will see in this table is the P value or

the likelihood that results are just due to chance, the stars let you know that

the results have been found to be statistically significant,the more stars

the more significant and the less likely the results were just due to chance.