RStats Statistics and Research Camp 2014

1 / 8

# RStats Statistics and Research Camp 2014 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

RStats Statistics and Research Camp 2014. Meta-Analysis Session 4. Melissa Maier, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Communication. Rationale. Narrative Review Meta-Analysis: Mathematical Reduce Type II error Correct statistical artifacts Test possible moderator variables

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.

## RStats Statistics and Research Camp 2014

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

### RStats Statistics and Research Camp 2014

Meta-Analysis

Session 4

Melissa Maier, Ph.D.

Assistant Professor

Communication

Rationale
• Narrative Review
• Meta-Analysis:
• Mathematical
• Reduce Type II error
• Correct statistical artifacts
• Test possible moderator variables
• Evaluate theoretical arguments
• Practical
Method
• Construct database of all relevant research
• Analyze articles to determine (and correct):
• Sample size
• Effect size
• Moderators
• Calculate average effect size
• Test for homogeneity
• If heterogenous, test for moderators and outliers
Calculate Ave. Effect

Are female same-sex relationships more intimate than male same-sex relationships?

Write-up
• Justification for review
• Methodology
• Describe search methods
• Code possible moderators (or model)
• Describe statistical procedures
• Results
• Average effect
• Number of studies, k
• Overall combined sample size, N
• Measure of variability
• Evaluation of homogeneity
• Measure of significance of average effect
• Discussion
Limitations of Meta-Analysis
• Contextual restrictions
• Unequal value of claims
• Ethnographic trap
• Multiplicity of interpretation
• Misapplication of the level of analysis
Supplemental Resources

Burrell, N.A., Allen, M., Gayle, B.M., & Preiss, R.W. (Eds). (2014). Managing interpersonal conflict: Advances through meta-analysis. New York: Routledge.

Hunter, J.E., & Schmidt, F.L. (1990). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Hunter, J.E., & Schmidt, F.L. (2002). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Hunter, J.E., Schmidt, F.L., & Jackson, G.B. (1982).Meta-analysis: Cumulating research findings across studies. London: Sage.

Lipsey, M.W., & Wilson, D.B. (2001). Practical meta-analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Preiss, R., & Allen, M. (1995). Understanding and using meta-analysis. Evaluation & the Health Professions, 18, 315-335.

Preiss, R., & Allen, M. (2001). Understanding and using meta-analysis. In R. Preiss, B. Gayle, N. Burrell, M. Allen, & J. Bryant (Eds.), Mass media effects research: Advances through meta-analysis (pp. 15-30). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

The Meta-Analysis Calculator:

http://www.lyonsmorris.com/ma1/