Meta-analytic Reviews in the Organizational Sciences: Two Meta-analytic Schools on the Way to MARS (the Meta-analytic Reporting Standards)

被引:135
|
作者
Kepes, Sven [1 ]
McDaniel, Michael A. [1 ]
Brannick, Michael T. [2 ]
Banks, George C. [3 ]
机构
[1] Virginia Commonwealth Univ, Sch Business, Richmond, VA 23284 USA
[2] Univ S Florida, Tampa, FL USA
[3] Longwood Univ, Farmville, VA USA
关键词
Systematic review; Psychometric meta-analysis; Hedges and Olkin tradition of meta-analysis; Organizational sciences; Medical sciences; RANDOM-EFFECTS MODELS; FILE DRAWER PROBLEM; PUBLICATION BIAS; CORRELATION-COEFFICIENTS; VALIDITY GENERALIZATION; MONTE-CARLO; CONFIDENCE-INTERVALS; MODERATOR VARIABLES; STATISTICAL POWER; CAUTIONARY NOTE;
D O I
10.1007/s10869-013-9300-2
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
The purpose of this study was to review the Meta-Analysis Reporting Standards (MARS) of the American Psychological Association (APA) and highlight opportunities for improvement of meta-analytic reviews in the organizational sciences. The paper reviews MARS, describes "best" meta-analytic practices across two schools of meta-analysis, and shows how implementing such practices helps achieve the aims set forth in MARS. Examples of best practices are provided to aid readers in finding models for their own research. Meta-analytic reviews are a primary avenue for the accumulation of knowledge in the organizational sciences as well as many other areas of science. Unfortunately, many meta-analytic reviews in the organizational sciences do not fully follow professional guidelines and standards as closely as they should. Such deviations from best practice undermine the transparency and replicability of the reviews and thus their usefulness for the generation of cumulative knowledge and evidence-based practice. This study shows how implementing "best" meta-analytic practices helps to achieve the aims set forth in MARS. Although the paper is written primarily for organizational scientists, the paper's recommendations are not limited to any particular scientific domain.
引用
收藏
页码:123 / 143
页数:21
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Meta-analytic Reviews in the Organizational Sciences: Two Meta-analytic Schools on the Way to MARS (the Meta-analytic Reporting Standards)
    Sven Kepes
    Michael A. McDaniel
    Michael T. Brannick
    George C. Banks
    [J]. Journal of Business and Psychology, 2013, 28 : 123 - 143
  • [2] Systematic reviews and meta-analytic techniques
    Baird, Robert
    [J]. SEMINARS IN PEDIATRIC SURGERY, 2018, 27 (06) : 338 - 344
  • [3] META-ANALYTIC FUNCTIONS
    SASTRY, MSK
    [J]. TRANSACTIONS OF THE AMERICAN MATHEMATICAL SOCIETY, 1971, 157 (JUN) : 399 - &
  • [4] A CALL FOR CAUTIOUS INTERPRETATION OF META-ANALYTIC REVIEWS
    Boers, Frank
    Bryfonski, Lara
    Faez, Farahnaz
    McKay, Todd
    [J]. STUDIES IN SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION, 2021, 43 (01) : 2 - 24
  • [5] Organizational Culture and Innovation: A Meta-Analytic Review
    Bueschgens, Thorsten
    Bausch, Andreas
    Balkin, David B.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PRODUCT INNOVATION MANAGEMENT, 2013, 30 (04) : 763 - 781
  • [6] The meta-analytic big bang
    Shadish, William R.
    Lecy, Jesse D.
    [J]. RESEARCH SYNTHESIS METHODS, 2015, 6 (03) : 246 - 264
  • [7] META-ANALYTIC STUDIES IN PSYCHOLOGY
    Kornilov, S. A.
    Kornilova, T. V.
    [J]. PSIKHOLOGICHESKII ZHURNAL, 2010, 31 (06) : 5 - 17
  • [8] A NEW META-ANALYTIC APPROACH
    RAJU, NS
    BURKE, MJ
    NORMAND, J
    LANGLOIS, GM
    [J]. JOURNAL OF APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY, 1991, 76 (03) : 432 - 446
  • [9] Pride: A Meta-Analytic Project
    Dickens, Leah R.
    Robins, Richard W.
    [J]. EMOTION, 2022, 22 (05) : 1071 - 1087
  • [10] The reliability of meta-analytic review
    Zakzanis, KK
    [J]. PSYCHOLOGICAL REPORTS, 1998, 83 (01) : 215 - 222