Direct comparison
Eta-Squared vs. Partial Eta-Squared
Eta-squared divides by total variance; partial eta-squared divides by that effect plus error only. Comparing the two across studies is misleading.
Written and maintained by CASRAI Editorial Board
Last updated
Ask CASRAI · free to try
Ask about Eta-Squared vs. Partial Eta-Squared
Ask your first 2 questions free below. Subscribers get 150 a day for $29 a month.
An AI assistant specialized in research administration. It cites the sources behind every answer, labels web answers and says when it can't answer.
Answers draw on CASRAI's guides and dictionary plus the federal and funder documents we index: Federal Register, Grants.gov, Regulations.gov and UKRI.
Works on this site and inside Claude, Cursor and the AI tools you already use.
Everything CASRAI publishes — this page, the dictionary, the guides and the news — stays free to read, with no account and no card.
How do Eta-squared (η²), Partial eta-squared (partial η²) compare side by side?
The table below compares Eta-squared (η²), Partial eta-squared (partial η²) across 10 procurement-relevant dimensions, from what it divides by (denominator) through best used for.
Side-by-side comparison
| Dimension | Eta-squared (η²) | Partial eta-squared (partial η²) |
|---|---|---|
| What it divides by (denominator) | Total variance across the whole design (SS_total) | That effect's own sum of squares plus error only (SS_effect + SS_error) |
| Formula | η² = SS_effect / SS_total | partial η² = SS_effect / (SS_effect + SS_error) |
| Value in a one-way (single-factor) ANOVA | Identical to partial eta-squared — SS_total = SS_effect + SS_error when there is only one effect | Identical to eta-squared, for the same reason |
| Value in a multi-factor (factorial) ANOVA | Smaller than partial eta-squared for the same effect — other factors’ variance stays in the denominator | Larger than eta-squared for the same effect — other factors’ variance is excluded from the denominator |
| Sum across every effect + error in one model | Sums to exactly 1 (every effect shares the same SS_total denominator) | Does not sum to anything meaningful — each effect has its own denominator |
| Sensitive to how many other factors are in the model | No, in a balanced orthogonal design — SS_effect and SS_total for a given effect are unaffected by adding unrelated factors | Yes — adding factors that explain residual variance shrinks SS_error, inflating partial eta-squared for effects already in the model |
| Comparable across studies with a different number of factors | More stable, but still strictly comparable only across the same overall design | Not comparable — the value for the same real effect shifts purely from what else was modeled alongside it |
| Typical statistical-software default | Rarely a checkbox default — usually computed by hand from reported SS values | SPSS's built-in GLM “Estimates of Effect Size” option reports this by default, a major reason it dominates the published literature |
| Range | 0 to 1 | 0 to 1 |
| Best used for | Describing how much of the total outcome variance the whole study design accounted for | Comparing one factor's effect against its own error term, within a single specified model |
Common questions
Common questions about Eta-squared (η²) vs Partial eta-squared (partial η²)
Are eta-squared and partial eta-squared ever the same number?
+
Yes — in a one-way ANOVA with a single factor, SS_total equals SS_effect + SS_error by definition, so the two formulas produce an identical value. They only diverge once a second factor or an interaction term enters the model.
Why don’t partial eta-squared values for different effects in the same model add up to 1?
+
Because each partial eta-squared uses a different denominator — that specific effect’s SS plus error only — rather than the shared SS_total that classical eta-squared values use. Summing values computed against different denominators is not a meaningful operation, unlike classical eta-squared, whose components genuinely partition SS_total and sum to exactly 1.
Which one should I report?
+
Report whichever answers your actual question, and name it explicitly. Classical eta-squared answers "how much of the total outcome variance did this whole design explain"; partial eta-squared answers "how large is this one effect relative to its own error term." Many papers report partial eta-squared (often because it is the software default) while calling it simply "eta-squared," which is the specific misreport this page addresses.
Can I compare a partial eta-squared from one study to one from another study?
+
Only if both studies used a comparably structured model (similar factors and covariates). A partial eta-squared computed inside a two-factor design is not directly comparable to the "same" effect’s partial eta-squared inside a five-factor design — additional factors that soak up residual variance will inflate partial eta-squared for effects already in the model, even though those effects themselves did not change.
