Obtaining Unbiased Results in Meta-Analysis: The Importance of Correcting for Statistical Artifacts

Abstract

Most published meta-analyses address only artifactual variance due to sampling error and ignore the role of other statistical and psychometric artifacts, such as measurement error variance (due to factors including unreliability of measurements, group misclassification, and variable treatment strength) and selection effects (including range restriction or enhancement and collider biases). These artifacts can have severe biasing effects on the results of individual studies and meta-analyses. Failing to account for these artifacts can lead to inaccurate conclusions about the mean effect size and between-studies effect-size heterogeneity, and can influence the results of meta-regression, publication-bias, and sensitivity analyses. In this article, we provide a brief introduction to the biasing effects of measurement error variance and selection effects and their relevance to a variety of research designs. We describe how to estimate the effects of these artifacts in different research designs and correct for their impacts in primary studies and meta-analyses. We consider meta-analyses of correlations, observational group differences, and experimental effects. We provide R code to implement the corrections described.

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 — 135 citations exist upstream.

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