Narrative Versus Meta-Analytic Reviews of Race Differences in Motivation: A Comment on Cooper and Dorr

Abstract

Some of the benefits and shortcomings of a meta-analytic approach to reviewing race differences in need for achievement (Cooper & Dorr, 1995) are examined and compared to the narrative approach that I adopted in a previous review on this topic (Graham, 1994). Among the benefits of meta-analysis are the calculation of effect sizes for race differences (compared to the box score method of my narrative review) and the presentation of replicable and objective procedures for organizing, describing, and comparing study characteristics. Among the perceived limitations are the meta-analyst’s reluctance to distinguish between low- and high-quality studies and an overemphasis on quantitative comparisons of substantively disparate literatures. The implications for studying race as a psychological variable are also discussed.

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 — 22 citations exist upstream.

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