English
 
Help Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Released

Report

Toward cumulative cognitive science: a comparison of meta-analysis, mega-analysis, and hybrid approaches

MPS-Authors
/persons/resource/persons221846

Koile,  Ezequiel
Linguistic and Cultural Evolution, Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Max Planck Society;

External Resource
No external resources are shared
Fulltext (restricted access)
There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.
Fulltext (public)

shh3034.pdf
(Preprint), 2MB

Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available
Citation

Koile, E., & Cristia, A.(2021). Toward cumulative cognitive science: a comparison of meta-analysis, mega-analysis, and hybrid approaches (shh3034). doi:10.1162/opmi_a_00048.


Cite as: https://hdl.handle.net/21.11116/0000-0009-4DBD-D
Abstract
There is increasing interest in cumulative approaches to science, in which instead of analyzing the results of individual papers separately, we integrate information qualitatively or quantitatively. One such approach is meta-analysis, which has over 50 years of literature supporting its usefulness, and is becoming more common in cognitive science. However, changes in technical possibilities by the widespread use of Python and R make it easier to fit more complex models, and even simulate missing data. Here we recommend the use of mega-analyses (based on the aggregation of data sets collected by independent researchers) and hybrid meta- mega-analytic approaches, for cases where raw data is available for some studies. We illustrate the three approaches using a rich test-retest data set of infants’ speech processing as well as synthetic data. We discuss advantages and disadvantages of the three approaches from the viewpoint of a cognitive scientists contemplating their use, and limitations of this article, to be addressed in future work.