IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/somere/v51y2022i2p566-604.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Meta-analysis in Sociological Research: Power and Heterogeneity

Author

Listed:
  • Guangyu Tong
  • Guang Guo

Abstract

Meta-analysis is a statistical method that combines quantitative findings from previous studies. It has been increasingly used to obtain more credible results in a wide range of scientific fields. Combining the results of relevant studies allows researchers to leverage study similarities while modeling potential sources of between-study heterogeneity. This article provides a review of the core methodologies of meta-analysis that we consider most relevant to sociological research. After developing the foundation of the fixed- and random-effects models of meta-analysis models, this article illustrates the utility of the method with regression coefficients reported from two sets of social science studies. We explain the various steps of the process including constructing the meta-sample from primary studies, estimating the fixed- and random-effects models, analyzing the source of heterogeneity across studies, and assessing publication bias. We conclude with a discussion of steps that could be taken to strengthen the development of meta-analysis in sociological research, which will eventually increase the credibility of sociological inquiry via a knowledge-cumulative process.

Suggested Citation

  • Guangyu Tong & Guang Guo, 2022. "Meta-analysis in Sociological Research: Power and Heterogeneity," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 51(2), pages 566-604, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:somere:v:51:y:2022:i:2:p:566-604
    DOI: 10.1177/0049124119882479
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0049124119882479
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0049124119882479?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stephen Benard & Shelley Correll & In Paik, 2007. "Getting a job: Is there a motherhood penalty?," Natural Field Experiments 00227, The Field Experiments Website.
    2. Oleg Poldin & Diliara Valeeva & Maria Yudkevich, 2016. "Which Peers Matter: How Social Ties Affect Peer-group Effects," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 57(4), pages 448-468, June.
    3. Bruce Sacerdote, 2014. "Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Analysis of Peer Effects: Two Steps Forward?," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 6(1), pages 253-272, August.
    4. Sue Duval & Richard Tweedie, 2000. "Trim and Fill: A Simple Funnel-Plot–Based Method of Testing and Adjusting for Publication Bias in Meta-Analysis," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 56(2), pages 455-463, June.
    5. Glenn Firebaugh, 2008. "The First Rule, from Seven Rules for Social Research," Introductory Chapters, in: Seven Rules for Social Research, Princeton University Press.
    6. Charles F. Manski, 1993. "Identification of Endogenous Social Effects: The Reflection Problem," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 60(3), pages 531-542.
    7. Chris Doucouliagos & T.D. Stanley, 2013. "Are All Economic Facts Greatly Exaggerated? Theory Competition And Selectivity," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(2), pages 316-339, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Alderotti, Giammarco & Rapallini, Chiara & Traverso, Silvio, 2023. "The Big Five personality traits and earnings: A meta-analysis," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Adam S. Booij & Edwin Leuven & Hessel Oosterbeek, 2017. "Ability Peer Effects in University: Evidence from a Randomized Experiment," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 84(2), pages 547-578.
    2. SHIMAMOTO Daichi & Yu Ri KIM & TODO Yasuyuki, 2019. "The Effect of Social Interactions on Exporting Activities: Evidence from Micro, Small, and Medium-Sized Enterprises in rural Vietnam," Discussion papers 19020, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    3. Ingo E. Isphording & Ulf Zölitz, 2020. "The value of a peer," ECON - Working Papers 342, Department of Economics - University of Zurich.
    4. Adam Altmejd & Andrés Barrios-Fernández & Marin Drlje & Joshua Goodman & Michael Hurwitz & Dejan Kovac & Christine Mulhern & Christopher Neilson & Jonathan Smith, 2021. "O Brother, Where Start Thou? Sibling Spillovers on College and Major Choice in Four Countries," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 136(3), pages 1831-1886.
    5. Christopher Neilson & Adam Altmejd & Andres Barrios-Fernandez & Marin Drlje & Dejan Kovac, 2019. "Siblings' Effects on College and Major Choices: Evidence from Chile, Croatia and Sweden," Working Papers 633, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Industrial Relations Section..
    6. Yann Algan & Quoc-Anh Do & Nicolò Dalvit & Alexis Le Chapelain & Yves Zenou, 2015. "How Social Networks Shape Our Beliefs: A Natural Experiment among Future French Politicians," Working Papers hal-03459820, HAL.
    7. Chesney, Alexander J., 2022. "Should I get a master’s degree?," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    8. Ugur, Mehmet & Trushin, Eshref & Solomon, Edna & Guidi, Francesco, 2016. "R&D and productivity in OECD firms and industries: A hierarchical meta-regression analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(10), pages 2069-2086.
    9. Christos Genakos & Eleni Kyrkopoulou, 2022. "Social policy gone bad educationally: unintended peer effects from transferred students," CEP Discussion Papers dp1851, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    10. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/78vacv4udu92eq3fec89svm9uv is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Berlinski, Samuel & Ramos, Alejandra, 2020. "Peer effects in the decision to apply for a professional excellence award," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    12. Brandts, Jordi & Busom, Isabel & Lopez-Mayan, Cristina & Panadés, Judith, 2022. "Dispelling misconceptions about economics," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    13. Daichi Shimamoto & Yasuyuki Todo & Yu Ri Kim & Petr Matous, 2022. "Identifying and decomposing peer effects on decision-making using a randomized controlled trial," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 63(2), pages 1029-1058, August.
    14. Finseraas, Henning & Johnsen, Åshild A. & Kotsadam, Andreas & Torsvik, Gaute, 2016. "Exposure to female colleagues breaks the glass ceiling—Evidence from a combined vignette and field experiment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 363-374.
    15. Brodaty, Thibault & Gurgand, Marc, 2016. "Good peers or good teachers? Evidence from a French University," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 62-78.
    16. Higney, Anthony & Hanley, Nick & Moro, Mirko, 2022. "The lead-crime hypothesis: A meta-analysis," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    17. Kazushi Takahashi & Yukichi Mano & Keijiro Otsuka, 2018. "Spillovers as a Driver to Reduce Ex-post Inequality Generated by Randomized Experiments: Evidence from an Agricultural Training Intervention," Working Papers 174, JICA Research Institute.
    18. SHIMAMOTO Daichi & TODO Yasuyuki & Yu Ri KIM & Petr MATOUS, 2016. "Identifying and Decomposing Peer Effects on Participation Decisions Using a Randomized Controlled Trial," Discussion papers 16083, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    19. Lopez-Mayan, Cristina & Nicodemo, Catia, 2023. "“If my buddies use drugs, will I?” Peer effects on Substance Consumption Among Teenagers," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    20. Bertoni, Marco & Nistico, Roberto, 2019. "Ordinal Rank and Peer Composition: Two Sides of the Same Coin?," IZA Discussion Papers 12789, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    21. Bryan S. Graham, 2015. "Methods of Identification in Social Networks," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 7(1), pages 465-485, August.

    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:sae:somere:v:51:y:2022:i:2:p:566-604. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.