Sample Size, Statistical Power, and False Conclusions in Infant Looking-Time Research

Infant research is hard. It is difficult, expensive, and time-consuming to identify, recruit, and test infants. As a result, ours is a field of small sample sizes. Many studies using infant looking time as a measure have samples of 8-12 infants per cell, and studies with more than 24 infants per cell are uncommon. This paper examines the effect of such sample sizes on statistical power and the conclusions drawn from infant looking-time research. An examination of the state of the current literature suggests that most published looking-time studies have low power, which leads in the long run to an increase in both false positive and false negative results. Three data sets with relatively large samples (>30 infants) were used to simulate experiments with smaller sample sizes; 1,000 random subsamples of 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 infants from the overall samples were selected, making it possible to examine the systematic effect of sample size on the results. This approach revealed that despite clear results with the original large samples, the results with smaller subsamples were highly variable, yielding both false positive and false negative outcomes. Finally, a number of emerging possible solutions are discussed.