Comparison of Three Meta-Analytic Procedures for Estimating Moderating Effects of Categorical Variables

Abstract

The authors conducted Monte Carlo simulations to compare the Hedges and Olkin, the Hunter and Schmidt, and a refinement of the Aguinis and Pierce meta-analytic approaches for estimating moderating effects of categorical variables. The simulation examined binary moderator variables (e.g., gender—male, female; ethnicity—majority, minority). The authors compared the three meta-analytic methods in terms of their point estimation accuracy and Type I and Type II error rates. Results provide guidelines to help researchers choose among the three meta-analytic techniques based on theory (i.e., exploratory vs. confirmatory research) and research design considerations (i.e., degree of range restriction and measurement error).

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 — 108 citations exist upstream.

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