TL; DR- Effect size interpretation requires more than numeric interpretation of the effect size. You need to think about what would be considered a big deal, real-life change worth pursuing, given the real-world implications for your data. For example, there is a  malaria vaccine with a 30% success rate undergoing  a large scale trial in Malawi . If you consider that many other vaccines have much higher success rates, 30% seems like a relatively small "real world" impact, right? However, two million people are diagnosed with malaria every year. If science could help 30% of two million, the relatively small effect of 30% is a big deal. Hell, a 10% reduction would be wonderful. So, a small practical effect, like "just" 30%, is actually a big deal, given the issue's scale. How to use this news story: a) Interpreting effect sizes beyond Cohen's numeric recommendations. b) A primer on large-scale medical trials and their ridiculously large n-sizes and tra...