Beyond Overall Effects: A Bayesian Approach to Finding Constraints Across A Collection Of Studies In Meta-Analysis

Date created: | Last Updated:

Identifiers: DOI | ARK

Creating DOI and ARK. Please wait...

Create DOI / ARK

Category: Project

Description: Most meta-analyses focus on meta-analytic means, testing whether they are significantly different from zero and how they depend on covariates. This mean is difficult to defend as a construct because the underlying distribution of studies reflects many factors such as how we choose to run experiments. We argue that the fundamental questions of meta-analysis should not be about the aggregated mean; instead, one should ask which relations are stable across all the studies. In a typical meta-analysis, there is a preferred or hypothesized direction (e.g., that violent video games increase, rather than decrease, agressive behavior). We ask whether all studies in a meta-analysis have true effects in a common direction. If so, this is an example of a stable relation across all the studies. We propose four models: (i) all studies are truly null; (ii) all studies share a single true nonzero effect; (iii) studies differ, but all true effects are in the same direction; and (iv) some study effects are truly positive while others are truly negative. We develop Bayes factor model comparison for these models and apply them to four extant meta-analyses to show their usefulness.

License: CC-By Attribution 4.0 International

This project represents a preprint. Learn more about how to work with preprint files. View preprint


Loading files...



Recent Activity

Loading logs...


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.

Create an Account Learn More Hide this message