The Influence of Judgment Calls on Meta-Analytic Findings

被引:1
作者
Tarrahi, Farid [1 ]
Eisend, Martin [1 ]
机构
[1] European Univ Viadrina, Grosse Scharrnstr 59, D-15230 Frankfurt, Oder, Germany
关键词
Empirical generalization; judgment calls; meta-analysis; META-ANALYSIS; EFFECT SIZES; STATISTICAL POWER; VALIDITY; CONCLUSIONS; DECISIONS; SELECTION; MODELS;
D O I
10.1080/00273171.2016.1147941
中图分类号
O1 [数学];
学科分类号
0701 ; 070101 ;
摘要
Previous research has suggested that judgment calls (i.e., methodological choices made in the process of conducting a meta-analysis) have a strong influence on meta-analytic findings and question their robustness. However, prior research applies case study comparison or reanalysis of a few meta-analyses with a focus on a few selected judgment calls. These studies neglect the fact that different judgment calls are related to each other and simultaneously influence the outcomes of a meta-analysis, and that meta-analytic findings can vary due to non-judgment call differences between meta-analyses (e.g., variations of effects over time). The current study analyzes the influence of 13 judgment calls in 176 meta-analyses in marketing research by applying a multivariate, multilevel meta-meta-analysis. The analysis considers simultaneous influences from different judgment calls on meta-analytic effect sizes and controls for alternative explanations based on non-judgment call differences between meta-analyses. The findings suggest that judgment calls have only a minor influence on meta-analytic findings, whereas non-judgment call differences between meta-analyses are more likely to explain differences in meta-analytic findings. The findings support the robustness of meta-analytic results and conclusions.
引用
收藏
页码:314 / 329
页数:16
相关论文
共 49 条
[1]   Comparison of three meta-analytic procedures for estimating moderating effects of categorical variables [J].
Aguinis, Herman ;
Sturman, Michael C. ;
Pierce, Charles A. .
ORGANIZATIONAL RESEARCH METHODS, 2008, 11 (01) :9-34
[2]   Meta-Analytic Choices and Judgment Calls: Implications for Theory Building and Testing, Obtained Effect Sizes, and Scholarly Impact [J].
Aguinis, Herman ;
Dalton, Dan R. ;
Bosco, Frank A. ;
Pierce, Charles A. ;
Dalton, Catherine M. .
JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT, 2011, 37 (01) :5-38
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2003, DESIGN REPORT EXPT
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2013, DEF MARK
[5]   Revealed or Concealed? Transparency of Procedures, Decisions, and Judgment Calls in Meta-Analyses [J].
Aytug, Zeynep G. ;
Rothstein, Hannah R. ;
Zhou, Wencang ;
Kern, Mary C. .
ORGANIZATIONAL RESEARCH METHODS, 2012, 15 (01) :103-133
[6]   The Kryptonite of Evidence-Based I-O Psychology [J].
Banks, George C. ;
McDaniel, Michael A. .
INDUSTRIAL AND ORGANIZATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY-PERSPECTIVES ON SCIENCE AND PRACTICE, 2011, 4 (01) :40-44
[7]  
Bhargava M., 1994, MARKET LETT, V5, P141, DOI 10.1007/BF00994104
[8]   Meta-analysis in marketing when studies contain multiple measurements [J].
Bijmolt, THA ;
Pieters, RGM .
MARKETING LETTERS, 2001, 12 (02) :157-169
[9]   ANALYZING META-ANALYSIS - POTENTIAL PROBLEMS, AN UNSUCCESSFUL REPLICATION, AND EVALUATION CRITERIA [J].
BULLOCK, RJ ;
SVYANTEK, DJ .
JOURNAL OF APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY, 1985, 70 (01) :108-115
[10]   A Meta-Meta-Analysis: Empirical Review of Statistical Power, Type I Error Rates, Effect Sizes, and Model Selection of Meta-Analyses Published in Psychology [J].
Cafri, Guy ;
Kromrey, Jeffrey D. ;
Brannick, Michael T. .
MULTIVARIATE BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH, 2010, 45 (02) :239-270