{"title":"Complementary Meta-Analytic Methods for the Quantitative Review of Research: 1. A Theoretical Overview","authors":"A. Figueredo, Candace J Black, A. Scott","doi":"10.2458/JMM.V4I2.17935","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Contents Meta-Analysis is a procedure designed to quantitatively analyze the methodological characteristics in studies sampled in conventional meta-analyses to assess the relationship between methodologies and outcomes. This article presents the rationale and procedures for conducting a Contents Meta-Analysis in conjunction with conventional Effects Meta-analysis. We provide an overview of the pertinent limitations of conventional meta-analysis from methodological and meta-scientific standpoint. We then introduce novel terminology distinguishing different kinds of complementary meta-analyses that address many of the problems previously identified for conventional meta-analyses. We would also like to direct readers to the second paper in this series (Figueredo, Black, & Scott, this issue), which demonstrates the utility of Contents Meta-Analysis with an empirical example and present findings regarding the generalizability of the effect sizes estimated. DOI:10.2458/azu_jmmss_v4i2_figueredo2","PeriodicalId":90602,"journal":{"name":"Journal of methods and measurement in the social sciences","volume":"4 1","pages":"21-45"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of methods and measurement in the social sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2458/JMM.V4I2.17935","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
Abstract
Contents Meta-Analysis is a procedure designed to quantitatively analyze the methodological characteristics in studies sampled in conventional meta-analyses to assess the relationship between methodologies and outcomes. This article presents the rationale and procedures for conducting a Contents Meta-Analysis in conjunction with conventional Effects Meta-analysis. We provide an overview of the pertinent limitations of conventional meta-analysis from methodological and meta-scientific standpoint. We then introduce novel terminology distinguishing different kinds of complementary meta-analyses that address many of the problems previously identified for conventional meta-analyses. We would also like to direct readers to the second paper in this series (Figueredo, Black, & Scott, this issue), which demonstrates the utility of Contents Meta-Analysis with an empirical example and present findings regarding the generalizability of the effect sizes estimated. DOI:10.2458/azu_jmmss_v4i2_figueredo2