IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

How do partly omitted control variables influence the averages used in meta-analysis in economics?

Listed author(s):
  • Martin Paldam


    (Department of Economics and Business, Aarhus University)

Meta regression analysis is used to extract the best average from a set of N primary studies of one economic parameter. Three averages of the N-set are discussed: The mean, the PET meta-average and the augmented meta-average. They are affected by control variables that are used in some of the primary studies. They are the POCs, partly omitted controls, of the meta-study. Some POCs are ceteris paribus controls chosen to make results from different data samples comparable. They should differ. Others are model variables. They may be true and should always be included, while others are false and should always be excluded, if only we knew. If POCs are systematically included for their effect on the estimate of the parameter, it gives publication bias. It is corrected by the meta-average. If a POC is randomly included, it gives a bias, which is corrected by the augmented meta-average. With many POCs very many augmentations are possible. The mean of all augmented meta-averages is also the mean of the N-set. If it has a publication bias so do the average augmented meta-averages.

If 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.

File URL:
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Department of Economics and Business Economics, Aarhus University in its series Economics Working Papers with number 2013-22.

in new window

Length: 28
Date of creation: 03 Oct 2013
Handle: RePEc:aah:aarhec:2013-22
Contact details of provider: Web page:

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

in new window

  1. Sala-i-Martin, Xavier, 1997. "I Just Ran Two Million Regressions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 87(2), pages 178-183, May.
  2. Martin Paldam & Laurent Callot, 2010. "Natural funnel asymmetries. A simulation analysis of the three basic tools of meta analysis," Economics Working Papers 2010-01, Department of Economics and Business Economics, Aarhus University.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aah:aarhec:2013-22. See general 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: ()

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.