Grey literature and publication bias in MetaLab meta-analyses

Date created: | Last Updated:

: DOI | ARK

Creating DOI. Please wait...

Create DOI

Category: Project

Description: Meta-analyses are an indispensable research synthesis tool for characterizing bodies of literature and advancing theories. In typical meta-analyses, noisy measurements from multiple independent samples are normalized onto a single scale (typically a measure of effect size) and combined statistically to produce a more accurate measurement. Effects for meta-analysis can come from the published literature, unpublished data, or even the author’s own work, but different strategies for identifying datapoints for inclusion can have major consequences for the interpretation of the meta-analytic estimate. In particular, the exclusion of unpublished work can lead to a bias for positive findings and compromise validity. Thus, it is important to assess the utility – and impact – of strategies for including unpublished datas. In the present article, we describe our successes and failures with gathering unpublished data for meta-analyses within developmental psychology, and assess how the addition of these datapoints changes the conclusions drawn from meta-analyses. PREPRINT CAN BE FOUND IN MetaArXiv LINK BELOW

License: CC-By Attribution 4.0 International

Files

Loading files...

Citation

Recent Activity

Loading logs...

OSF does not support the use of Internet Explorer. For optimal performance, please switch to another browser.
Accept
This website relies on cookies to help provide a better user experience. By clicking Accept or continuing to use the site, you agree. For more information, see our Privacy Policy and information on cookie use.
Accept
×

Start managing your projects on the OSF today.

Free and easy to use, the Open Science Framework supports the entire research lifecycle: planning, execution, reporting, archiving, and discovery.