How Small Is "Meaningful"? Lay Perceptions of Common-Language Effect Sizes in US Residents

Two US samples (MTurk, N = 265, and representative panel, N = 1550) judged the meaningfulness of common-language effect sizes (CLES; McGraw & Wong, 1992). Majority concurrence that effects were "real" happened around conventionally medium sizes (r = .3). Our findings have implications for communicating scientific results to the public.