Assessing Cumulative Evidence within ‘Macro’ Research: Why Meta‐Analysis Should be Preferred Over Vote Counting
AbstractUnderstanding the conclusions a body of evidence offers involves accumulating findings. Two recent articles used vote counting to assess the evidence related to important macro theories: transaction cost theory and resource-based theory. Each concluded that its focal theory is not well supported. In contrast, recent meta‐analyses of the same theories concluded that both are strongly supported. We explain why macro researchers should trust the findings of meta‐analyses but not those of vote counts. A direct implication is that researchers interested in advancing transaction cost and resource‐based theories need to build upon the meta‐analytic evidence. A broader implication is that, as the preferred method for accumulating evidence, meta‐analysis can be a catalyst for the re‐evaluation of established theories and the development of new theory.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Wiley Blackwell in its journal Journal of Management Studies.
Volume (Year): 48 (2011)
Issue (Month): 1 (January)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0022-2380
You can help add them by filling out this form.
reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Access and download statisticsgeneral information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing) or (Christopher F. Baum).
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.