IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/inorps/v10y2017i03p472-479_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Empirical Benchmarks for Interpreting Effect Size Variability in Meta-Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Wiernik, Brenton M.
  • Kostal, Jack W.
  • Wilmot, Michael P.
  • Dilchert, Stephan
  • Ones, Deniz S.

Abstract

Generalization in meta-analyses is not a dichotomous decision (typically encountered in papers using the Q test for homogeneity, the 75% rule, or null hypothesis tests). Inattention to effect size variability in meta-analyses may stem from a lack of guidelines for interpreting credibility intervals. In this commentary, we describe two methods for making practical interpretations and determining whether a particular SDÏ represents a meaningful level of variability.

Suggested Citation

  • Wiernik, Brenton M. & Kostal, Jack W. & Wilmot, Michael P. & Dilchert, Stephan & Ones, Deniz S., 2017. "Empirical Benchmarks for Interpreting Effect Size Variability in Meta-Analysis," Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(3), pages 472-479, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:inorps:v:10:y:2017:i:03:p:472-479_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S175494261700044X/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Carl J. Dunst & Deborah W. Hamby & Robin B. Howse & Helen Wilkie & Kimberly Annas, 2020. "Research Synthesis of Meta-Analyses of Preservice Teacher Preparation Practices in Higher Education," Higher Education Studies, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 10(1), pages 1-29, March.
    2. Elson, Malte, 2019. "Examining Psychological Science through Systematic Meta-Method Analysis: A Call for Research," MetaArXiv cj7xf, Center for Open Science.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:inorps:v:10:y:2017:i:03:p:472-479_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/iop .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.