Using beta coefficients to impute missing correlations in meta-analysis research: Reasons for caution.

Clicks: 288
ID: 43629
2018
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #41 of 210 articles by views in the journal of applied psychology

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 210 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Meta-analysis has become a well-accepted method for synthesizing empirical research about a given phenomenon. Many meta-analyses focus on synthesizing correlations across primary studies, but some primary studies do not report correlations. Peterson and Brown (2005) suggested that researchers could use standardized regression weights (i.e., beta coefficients) to impute missing correlations. Indeed, their beta estimation procedures (BEPs) have been used in meta-analyses in a wide variety of fields. In this study, the authors evaluated the accuracy of BEPs in meta-analysis. We first examined how use of BEPs might affect results from a published meta-analysis. We then developed a series of Monte Carlo simulations that systematically compared the use of existing correlations (that were not missing) to data sets that incorporated BEPs (that impute missing correlations from corresponding beta coefficients). These simulations estimated ρ̄ (mean population correlation) and SDρ (true standard deviation) across a variety of meta-analytic conditions. Results from both the existing meta-analysis and the Monte Carlo simulations revealed that BEPs were associated with potentially large biases when estimating ρ̄ and even larger biases when estimating SDρ. Using only existing correlations often substantially outperformed use of BEPs and virtually never performed worse than BEPs. Overall, the authors urge a return to the standard practice of using only existing correlations in meta-analysis. (PsycINFO Database Record
Reference Key
roth2018usingthe Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Roth, Philip L;Le, Huy;Oh, In-Sue;Van Iddekinge, Chad H;Bobko, Philip;
Journal the journal of applied psychology
Year 2018
DOI
10.1037/apl0000293
URL
Keywords
guillain-barré syndrome anti-ganglioside antibodies igg dimers intravenous immunoglobulins

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.