Comparison of Two Random-Effects Methods of Meta-Analysis
Document Type
Article
Publication Date
2002
Keywords
Schmidt-Hunter methods; Hedges & Vevea methods; meta-analysis; random-effects methods
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
http://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.2.377
Abstract
Two studies compared the Schmidt-Hunter method of meta-analysis (J. E. Hunter & F. L. Schmidt, 1990) with the method described by L. V. Hedges and J. L. Vevea (1998). Study 1 evaluated estimates of ρ̄, ςρ, and resulting credibility intervals for both models through Monte Carlo methods. Results showed slight differences between the 2 methods. In Study 2, a reanalysis of published meta-analyses using both methods with several artifact distributions showed that although both choice of technique and type of correction could matter, the technique of meta-analysis used is less influential on the study outcome than is the choice of artifact correction.
Was this content written or created while at USF?
Yes
Citation / Publisher Attribution
Journal of Applied Psychology, v. 87, issue 2, p. 377-389
Scholar Commons Citation
Hall, Steven M. and Brannick, Michael T., "Comparison of Two Random-Effects Methods of Meta-Analysis" (2002). Psychology Faculty Publications. 2336.
https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/psy_facpub/2336
