Single paper meta‐analysis is unavoidable

Abstract

Abstract We advocate that the multiple studies of a common phenomenon that are featured in a typical behavioral research paper be jointly analyzed to provide a statistical summary of the set of studies as a whole. Indeed, we view such single paper meta‐analysis as unavoidable in typical behavioral research papers because (i) such papers feature multiple studies of a common phenomenon, (ii) such papers contain summaries of those studies, and (iii) statistical summaries of studies (i.e., meta‐analyses) are superior to non‐statistical summaries of them. Nonetheless, the current dominant practice is for such papers to feature separate statistical analyses of the data from each of the studies but to contain a non‐statistical summary of the multiple studies rather than a statistical summary. We believe that this is regrettable and therefore aim to rectify matters. Consequently, we review some considerations about meta‐analysis and statistical analysis more broadly; compare single paper meta‐analysis to traditional meta‐analysis and illustrate its benefits via a case study; discuss and dismiss concern about single paper meta‐analysis; and discuss single paper meta‐analysis and the review process.

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 — 9 citations exist upstream.

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