Contents

MAGIC criteria

What are the MAGIC criteria?[edit]

MAGIC is a backronym for:

1. Magnitude – How big is the effect? Large effects are more compelling than small ones.
2. Articulation – How specific is it?^[2] Precise statements are more compelling than imprecise ones.
3. Generality – How generally does it apply?^[1] More general effects are more compelling than less general ones. Claims that would interest a more general audience are more compelling.^[2]
4. Interestingness – interesting effects are those that "have the potential, through empirical analysis, to change what people believe about an important issue".^[1] More interesting effects are more compelling than less interesting ones. In addition, more surprising effects are more compelling than ones that merely confirm what is already known.^[2]
5. Credibility – Credible claims are more compelling than incredible ones. The researcher must show that the claims made are credible.^[1] Results that contradict previously established ones are less credible.^[2]

Reviews and applications of the MAGIC criteria[edit]

Song Qian noted that the MAGIC criteria could be of use to ecologists.^[3] Claudia Stanny discussed them in a course on psychology.^[4] Anne Boomsma noted that they are useful when presenting results of complex statistical methods such as structural equation modelling.^[5]

See also[edit]

• Bradford Hill criteria – Criteria for measuring cause and effect

References[edit]