Hi all! I ran a correlation study with the maximum sample size that was possible, and found some strong significant effects as well as non-signifiant effects. I'm now trying to ascertain whether the sample size was appropriate.
I ran a post-hoc power analysis, and found output parameters ranging from .59 for the variables with the lowest correlation coefficients that were still statistically significant, to .9 for the highest coefficients. I'm inferring from this that the study was under-powered, but I've been reading that post-hoc power analysis is not recommended.
Any other ideas as to how I can check whether the sample size was appropriate, retrospectively?
Many thanks!
I ran a post-hoc power analysis, and found output parameters ranging from .59 for the variables with the lowest correlation coefficients that were still statistically significant, to .9 for the highest coefficients. I'm inferring from this that the study was under-powered, but I've been reading that post-hoc power analysis is not recommended.
Any other ideas as to how I can check whether the sample size was appropriate, retrospectively?
Many thanks!