Meta-Analyses in Management and Marketing: An Assessment

Meta-analysis plays a central role in evidence synthesis in management and marketing, yet little evidence exists on how closely published studies adhere to established methodological guidance. This paper provides a structured assessment of 100 meta-analyses published between 2023 and 2025 in top-tier journals. We document key features of current practice, including data scale and structure, estimator and effect-size choices, approaches to detecting and adjusting for publication bias, heterogeneity reporting and exploration, open science practices, and software usage. We find a substantial implementation gap between recommended methods and routine practice. Although most meta-analyses extract multiple effect sizes per primary study, fewer than 40% of those acknowledging dependence employ multilevel or multivariate models. Correlation-based effect sizes dominate but rarely incorporate recommended transformations or weighting strategies designed to avoid known algebraic distortions. Heterogeneity is extreme (median I² > 95%), yet are often only partially reported or explored. While publication bias is commonly tested, fewer than half of studies report bias-adjusted estimates, and low-powered diagnostic tools are frequently relied upon. We conclude by identifying inferential consequences that are particularly salient for the credibility and interpretability of meta-analytic evidence in management and marketing.