English
 
Help Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT
  Addressing publication bias in Meta-Analysis : Empirical findings from community-augmented meta-analyses of infant language development

Tsuji, S., Cristia, A., Frank, M. C., & Bergmann, C. (2020). Addressing publication bias in Meta-Analysis: Empirical findings from community-augmented meta-analyses of infant language development. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 228(1), 50-61. doi:10.1027/2151-2604/a000393.

Item is

Files

show Files
hide Files
:
TsujiCristiaFrankBergmann2020_ZfP.pdf (Publisher version), 2MB
Name:
TsujiCristiaFrankBergmann2020_ZfP.pdf
Description:
-
OA-Status:
Visibility:
Public
MIME-Type / Checksum:
application/pdf / [MD5]
Technical Metadata:
Copyright Date:
-
Copyright Info:
-
License:
-

Locators

show
hide
Locator:
Link to Dataset on PsychArchives (Supplementary material)
Description:
-
OA-Status:

Creators

show
hide
 Creators:
Tsuji, Sho1, Author           
Cristia, Alejandrina2, Author           
Frank, Michael C.3, Author
Bergmann, Christina4, Author           
Affiliations:
1University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan, ou_persistent22              
2PSL University Paris, Paris, France, ou_persistent22              
3Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA, ou_persistent22              
4Language Development Department, MPI for Psycholinguistics, Max Planck Society, ou_2340691              

Content

show
hide
Free keywords: -
 Abstract: Meta-analyses are an indispensable research synthesis tool for characterizing bodies of literature and advancing theories. One important open question concerns the inclusion of unpublished data into meta-analyses. Finding such studies can be effortful, but their exclusion potentially leads to consequential biases like overestimation of a literature’s mean effect. We address two questions about unpublished data using MetaLab, a collection of community-augmented meta-analyses focused on developmental psychology. First, we assess to what extent MetaLab datasets include gray literature, and by what search strategies they are unearthed. We find that an average of 11% of datapoints are from unpublished literature; standard search strategies like database searches, complemented with individualized approaches like including authors’ own data, contribute the majority of this literature. Second, we analyze the effect of including versus excluding unpublished literature on estimates of effect size and publication bias, and find this decision does not affect outcomes. We discuss lessons learned and implications.

Details

show
hide
Language(s): eng - English
 Dates: 2019-09-192020-03-31
 Publication Status: Published online
 Pages: -
 Publishing info: -
 Table of Contents: -
 Rev. Type: Peer
 Identifiers: DOI: 10.1027/2151-2604/a000393
 Degree: -

Event

show

Legal Case

show

Project information

show

Source 1

show
hide
Title: Zeitschrift für Psychologie
Source Genre: Journal
 Creator(s):
Affiliations:
Publ. Info: Leipzig : Johann Ambrosius Barth
Pages: - Volume / Issue: 228 (1) Sequence Number: - Start / End Page: 50 - 61 Identifier: ISSN: 0044-3409
CoNE: https://pure.mpg.de/cone/journals/resource/954925453915_1