1 / 8

RStats Statistics and Research Camp 2014

This meta-analysis session by Dr. Melissa Maier discusses the methodology to analyze and correct statistical artifacts in research to evaluate the intimacy levels in female versus male same-sex relationships. The session covers constructing a database, calculating average effect size, testing homogeneity, and more. Limitations such as contextual restrictions and misapplication of analysis levels are explored. Supplemental resources on meta-analysis methods are also provided.

kristyn
Download Presentation

RStats Statistics and Research Camp 2014

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. RStats Statistics and Research Camp 2014 Meta-Analysis Session 4 Melissa Maier, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Communication

  2. Rationale • Narrative Review • Meta-Analysis: • Mathematical • Reduce Type II error • Correct statistical artifacts • Test possible moderator variables • Evaluate theoretical arguments • Practical

  3. Method • Construct database of all relevant research • Analyze articles to determine (and correct): • Sample size • Effect size • Moderators • Calculate average effect size • Test for homogeneity • If heterogenous, test for moderators and outliers

  4. Calculate Ave. Effect Are female same-sex relationships more intimate than male same-sex relationships?

  5. Testing for homogeneity Test for homogeneity Χ2 = (d – ave d)2(N-k)

  6. Write-up • Justification for review • Methodology • Describe search methods • Code possible moderators (or model) • Describe statistical procedures • Results • Average effect • Number of studies, k • Overall combined sample size, N • Measure of variability • Evaluation of homogeneity • Measure of significance of average effect • Discussion

  7. Limitations of Meta-Analysis • Contextual restrictions • Unequal value of claims • Ethnographic trap • Multiplicity of interpretation • Misapplication of the level of analysis

  8. Supplemental Resources Burrell, N.A., Allen, M., Gayle, B.M., & Preiss, R.W. (Eds). (2014). Managing interpersonal conflict: Advances through meta-analysis. New York: Routledge. Hunter, J.E., & Schmidt, F.L. (1990). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Hunter, J.E., & Schmidt, F.L. (2002). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Hunter, J.E., Schmidt, F.L., & Jackson, G.B. (1982).Meta-analysis: Cumulating research findings across studies. London: Sage. Lipsey, M.W., & Wilson, D.B. (2001). Practical meta-analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Preiss, R., & Allen, M. (1995). Understanding and using meta-analysis. Evaluation & the Health Professions, 18, 315-335. Preiss, R., & Allen, M. (2001). Understanding and using meta-analysis. In R. Preiss, B. Gayle, N. Burrell, M. Allen, & J. Bryant (Eds.), Mass media effects research: Advances through meta-analysis (pp. 15-30). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. The Meta-Analysis Calculator: http://www.lyonsmorris.com/ma1/

More Related