Meta-analysis
From PsychWiki - A Collaborative Psychology Wiki
(Difference between revisions)
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
* In a meta-analysis, have judge rate each variable across studies, one moderator at a time, instead of rating all variables in a single study before moving on to next study. | * In a meta-analysis, have judge rate each variable across studies, one moderator at a time, instead of rating all variables in a single study before moving on to next study. | ||
* With meta-analysis coding with a high number of studies to code, such as 75+, can have some coders rate the entire set, but can also have some coders (undergrads) code only a subset as long there is overlap, so that more than 1 judge is rating each study. | * With meta-analysis coding with a high number of studies to code, such as 75+, can have some coders rate the entire set, but can also have some coders (undergrads) code only a subset as long there is overlap, so that more than 1 judge is rating each study. | ||
| + | |||
| Line 13: | Line 14: | ||
---- | ---- | ||
| - | ► Back to [[Professional_Development| | + | ► Back to [[Professional_Development|Professional Development mainpage]] |
Revision as of 19:31, 5 March 2006
Meta-analysis
(this page has just been created... can you think of more tips to add...)
- What is the good number of studies to have bare minimum for a meta-analysis? A meta-analysis with 10 studies have been published before but is not recommended.
- In a meta-analysis, don’t have raters code conditions for which no effect sizes can be calculated.
- In a meta-analysis, have judge rate each variable across studies, one moderator at a time, instead of rating all variables in a single study before moving on to next study.
- With meta-analysis coding with a high number of studies to code, such as 75+, can have some coders rate the entire set, but can also have some coders (undergrads) code only a subset as long there is overlap, so that more than 1 judge is rating each study.
► Back to Professional Development mainpage
