Misunderstanding Meta-Analysis

Abstract

Although it is increasingly common, meta-analysis is still a relatively new addition to the toolbox of research strategies. Partially because of its newness and partially because its early enthusiasts may have overstated its presumed contributions, a number of common misunderstandings have developed about the meta-analytic approach. These misunderstandings have to do with the way that meta-analysis is conducted and interpreted and its relation to primary research and narrative review. This article aims to highlight these misunderstandings and offer an alternative view of meta-analysis. It is hoped that meta-analytic research of the future will be a partnership with primary research and that meta-analysis will be valued not so much for its definitiveness as for the creative speculations it allows about patterns that appear across studies.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 25 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.