The DOI matches its Crossref record; 76 of the 76 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Correcting for Bias in Psychology: A Comparison of Meta-Analytic Methods
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Publication bias and questionable research practices in primary research can lead to badly overestimated effects in meta-analysis. Methodologists have proposed a variety of statistical approaches to correct for such overestimation. However, it is not clear which methods work best for data typically seen in psychology. Here, we present a comprehensive simulation study in which we examined how some of the most promising meta-analytic methods perform on data that might realistically be produced by research in psychology. We simulated several levels of questionable research practices, publication bias, and heterogeneity, and used study sample sizes empirically derived from the literature. Our results clearly indicated that no single meta-analytic method consistently outperformed all the others. Therefore, we recommend that meta-analysts in psychology focus on sensitivity analyses—that is, report on a variety of methods, consider the conditions under which these methods fail (as indicated by simulation studies such as ours), and then report how conclusions might change depending on which conditions are most plausible. Moreover, given the dependence of meta-analytic methods on untestable assumptions, we strongly recommend that researchers in psychology continue their efforts to improve the primary literature and conduct large-scale, preregistered replications. We provide detailed results and simulation code at https://osf.io/rf3ys and interactive figures at http://www.shinyapps.org/apps/metaExplorer/ .
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“The absence of publication bias is highly unlikely unless a set of preregistered reports is examined (Carter et al. 2019).”
From The gamification of learning: a meta-analysis (2020) · cites this paper as Carter et al. 2019
In the citing paper
“The trim-and-fill method (Duval & Tweedie, 2000) tends to adjust too little when bias is strong (Carter et al., 2019), and Fail-Safe N (Rosenthal, 1979) neither tests nor adjusts for the presence of bias.”
From Do Salient Social Norms Moderate Mortality Salience Effects? A (Challenging) Meta-Analysis of Terror Management Studies (2023) · cites this paper as Carter et al., 2019
In the citing paper
“Bias adjustments can improve performance relative to a meta-analysis that does not adjust for publication bias (Carter et al., 2019; McShane et al., 2016; Moreno et al., 2009; Simonsohn et al., 2014).”
From Do Salient Social Norms Moderate Mortality Salience Effects? A (Challenging) Meta-Analysis of Terror Management Studies (2023) · cites this paper as Carter et al., 2019
In the citing paper
“negative and statistically significant SPET estimates have been observed in both simulation studies (Carter et al., 2019) and meta-analysis (Hilgard et al., 2019).”
From Do Salient Social Norms Moderate Mortality Salience Effects? A (Challenging) Meta-Analysis of Terror Management Studies (2023) · cites this paper as Carter et al., 2019
In the citing paper
“On the one hand, this may be an underestimate of average study power—in simulation studies, p-hacking adds large p values to the p-curve, canceling out the right skew and biasing the p-curve estimate downward (Carter et al., 2019).”
From Do Salient Social Norms Moderate Mortality Salience Effects? A (Challenging) Meta-Analysis of Terror Management Studies (2023) · cites this paper as Carter et al., 2019
In the citing paper
“SPET and SPEESE have a downward bias in the presence of p-hacking (Carter et al., 2019)”
From Do Salient Social Norms Moderate Mortality Salience Effects? A (Challenging) Meta-Analysis of Terror Management Studies (2023) · cites this paper as Carter et al., 2019
In the citing paper
“There may also be downward bias inflicted by p-hacking (Carter et al., 2019).”
From Do Salient Social Norms Moderate Mortality Salience Effects? A (Challenging) Meta-Analysis of Terror Management Studies (2023) · cites this paper as Carter et al., 2019
In the citing paper
“Further, PET-PEESE can underestimate the effect size when there is publication bias and when p-hacking is present (Carter et al., 2019), which are two conditions likely affecting the literature.”
From Managing the terror of publication bias: A comprehensive p-curve analysis of the Terror Management Theory literature (2023) · cites this paper as Carter et al., 2019
In the citing paper
“However, this counterintuitive finding may be explained by the fact that PET is prone to producing imprecise and biased estimates under high heterogeneity, small sample sizes, and a large proportion of p-hacking (Stanley & Doucouliagos, 2014; Stanley 2017; Carter et al., 2019).”
From Managing the terror of publication bias: A comprehensive p-curve analysis of the Terror Management Theory literature (2023) · cites this paper as Carter et al., 2019
In the citing paper
“Simulation studies by Carter et al. (2019) showed that WAAP-WLS can provide a reasonably unbiased estimate of the effect size with a high power to detect the effect given that a true underlying effect exists.”
From Managing the terror of publication bias: A comprehensive p-curve analysis of the Terror Management Theory literature (2023) · cites this paper as Carter et al. (2019)
In the citing paper
“This could lead selection model to underestimate effects in the presence of publication bias and p-hacking, as shown in simulation studies (Carter et al., 2019).”
From Managing the terror of publication bias: A comprehensive p-curve analysis of the Terror Management Theory literature (2023) · cites this paper as Carter et al., 2019
In the citing paper
“Lastly, PET-PEESE can underestimate the size of small effects in the presence of p-hacking and publication bias (Carter et al., 2019).”
From Managing the terror of publication bias: A comprehensive p-curve analysis of the Terror Management Theory literature (2023) · cites this paper as Carter et al., 2019
In the citing paper
“However, when effects are highly heterogeneous and when sample sizes are small, the PET-PEESE analysis is known to yield imprecise estimates (Stanley & Doucouliagos, 2014; Stanley, 2017; Carter et al., 2019).”
From Managing the terror of publication bias: A comprehensive p-curve analysis of the Terror Management Theory literature (2023) · cites this paper as Carter et al., 2019
In the citing paper
“there is a danger that uncritical application can lead to inappropriate conclusions being drawn 68,73,74”
From Investigating and dealing with publication bias and other reporting biases in meta-analyses of health research: a review (2021) · cites this paper as [74]
In the citing paper
“the available evidence suggests that no single method outperforms others in all scenarios”
From Investigating and dealing with publication bias and other reporting biases in meta-analyses of health research: a review (2021) · cites this paper as [74]
Citations
Cites
R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing
R Core Team (2000) · doi:10.32614/r.manuals · Cited by 355,893
Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test
Egger, M., Smith, G. D., Schneider, M., & Minder, C. (1997) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629 · Cited by 56,722
Conducting Meta-Analyses in R with the metafor Package
Viechtbauer, W. (2010) · Journal of Statistical Software · doi:10.18637/jss.v036.i03 · Cited by 20,464
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2009) · doi:10.1002/9780470743386 · Cited by 14,225
Duval, S., & Tweedie, R. (2000) · Biometrics · doi:10.1111/j.0006-341x.2000.00455.x · Cited by 14,099
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2021) · doi:10.1002/9781119558378 · Cited by 9,799
Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., & Simonsohn, U. (2011) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0956797611417632 · Cited by 6,567
The Handbook of Research Synthesis and Meta-Analysis
(2019) · doi:10.7758/9781610448864 · Cited by 4,553
Publication and related bias in meta-analysis
Sterne, J. A. C., Gavaghan, D., & Egger, M. (2000) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/s0895-4356(00)00242-0 · Cited by 2,282
Ego depletion and the strength model of self-control: a meta-analysis
Hagger, M. S., Wood, C., Stiff, C., & Chatzisarantis, N. L. D. (2010) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0019486 · Cited by 2,265
Measuring the Prevalence of Questionable Research Practices With Incentives for Truth Telling
John, L. K., Loewenstein, G., & Prelec, D. (2012) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0956797611430953 · Cited by 2,239
Self-control as a limited resource: Regulatory depletion patterns.
Muraven, M., Tice, D. M., & Baumeister, R. F. (1998) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.74.3.774 · Cited by 1,724
Methods to estimate the between‐study variance and its uncertainty in meta‐analysis
Veroniki, A. A., Jackson, D., Viechtbauer, W., Bender, R., Bowden, J., Knapp, G., Kuss, O., Higgins, J. P., Langan, D., & Salanti, G. (2016) · Research Synthesis Methods · doi:10.1002/jrsm.1164 · Cited by 1,685
One Hundred Years of Social Psychology Quantitatively Described
Richard, F. D., Bond, C. F., & Stokes-Zoota, J. J. (2003) · Review of General Psychology · doi:10.1037/1089-2680.7.4.331 · Cited by 1,558
Publication bias in meta-analysis: Prevention, assessment and adjustments
Viechtbauer, W. (2007) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/s11336-006-1450-y · Cited by 1,508
Negative results are disappearing from most disciplines and countries
Fanelli, D. (2012) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-011-0494-7 · Cited by 1,248
A Multilab Preregistered Replication of the Ego-Depletion Effect
Hagger, M. S., Chatzisarantis, N. L. D., Alberts, H. J. E. M., Anggono, C. O., Batailler, C., Birt, A. R., Brand, R., Brand, M., Brewer, G., Bruyneel, S. D., et al. (2016) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691616652873 · Cited by 1,097
Consequences of prejudice against the null hypothesis.
Greenwald, A. G. (1975) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0076157 · Cited by 1,022 · cited 2×
“For example, if researchers strongly believe that an effect is real and positive, statistically non-significant or negative estimates of that effect may never be submitted for publication or may be rejected by reviewers and editors (Greenwald, 1975; Sterling, Rosenbaum, & Weinkam, 1995; Rothstein et al., 2006; Ferguso…”
BackgroundMany Labs 2: Investigating variation in replicability across samples and settings
Klein, R. A., Vianello, M., Hasselman, F., Adams, B. G., Adams, R. B., Alper, S., Aveyard, M., Axt, J. R., Babalola, M. T., Bahník, Š., et al. (2018) · Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/2515245918810225 · Cited by 944
Stanley, T. D., & Doucouliagos, H. (2014) · Research Synthesis Methods · doi:10.1002/jrsm.1095 · Cited by 916
Adjusting for publication bias in the presence of heterogeneity
Terrin, N., Schmid, C. H., Lau, J., & Olkin, I. (2003) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.1461 · Cited by 809
Meta-analysis of action video game impact on perceptual, attentional, and cognitive skills.
Bediou, B., Adams, D. M., Mayer, R. E., Tipton, E., Green, C. S., & Bavelier, D. (2018) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/bul0000130 · Cited by 807
The rules of the game called psychological science
Bakker, M., van Dijk, A., & Wicherts, J. M. (2012) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691612459060 · Cited by 800
Correlational effect size benchmarks
Bosco, F. A., Aguinis, H., Singh, K., Field, J. G., & Pierce, C. A. (2015) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0038047 · Cited by 768
The design of simulation studies in medical statistics
Burton, A., Altman, D. G., Royston, P. J., & HOLDER, R. L. (2006) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.2673 · Cited by 755
p -Curve and Effect Size: Correcting for Publication Bias Using Only Significant Results
Simonsohn, U., Nelson, L. D., & Simmons, J. P. (2014) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691614553988 · Cited by 717 · cited 3×
“A p-curve is the distribution of all statistically significant p-values from the set of studies of interest (i.e., ps < 0.05; Simonsohn et al., 2014).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialPeters, J. L., Sutton, A. J., Jones, D. R., Abrams, K. R., & Rushton, L. (2007) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.2889 · Cited by 716
Incorporating variations in the quality of individual randomized trials into meta-analysis
Detsky, A. S., Naylor, C. D., O'Rourke, K., McGeer, A. J., & L'Abbé, K. A. (1992) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/0895-4356(92)90085-2 · Cited by 640
The Power of Bias in Economics Research
Ioannidis, J. P. A., Stanley, T. D., & Doucouliagos, H. (2017) · The Economic Journal · doi:10.1111/ecoj.12461 · Cited by 634
Ferguson, C. J., & Heene, M. (2012) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691612459059 · Cited by 603
Carter, E. C., Kofler, L. M., Forster, D. E., & McCullough, M. E. (2015) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: General · doi:10.1037/xge0000083 · Cited by 594
Self-citationReporting standards for research in psychology: why do we need them? What might they be?
APA Publications and Communications Board Working Group on Journal Article Reporting Standards (2008) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.63.9.839 · Cited by 571
Meta-analysis, funnel plots and sensitivity analysis
Copas, J. (2000) · Biostatistics · doi:10.1093/biostatistics/1.3.247 · Cited by 503
Publication Bias in Research Synthesis: Sensitivity Analysis Using A Priori Weight Functions.
Vevea, J. L., & Woods, C. M. (2005) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.10.4.428 · Cited by 461
Pigott, T. D. (2012) · doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-2278-5 · Cited by 453
Sterling, T. D., Rosenbaum, W. L., & Weinkam, J. J. (1995) · The American Statistician · doi:10.1080/00031305.1995.10476125 · Cited by 453
Kühberger, A., Fritz, A., & Scherndl, T. (2014) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0105825 · Cited by 399
McShane, B. B., Böckenholt, U., & Hansen, K. T. (2016) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691616662243 · Cited by 398
Selection Models and the File Drawer Problem
Iyengar, S., & Greenhouse, J. B. (1988) · Statistical Science · doi:10.1214/ss/1177013012 · Cited by 388
Moreno, S. G., Sutton, A. J., Ades, A., Stanley, T. D., Abrams, K. R., Peters, J. L., & Cooper, N. J. (2009) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/1471-2288-9-2 · Cited by 373
Meta-assessment of bias in science
Fanelli, D., Costas, R., & Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2017) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1618569114 · Cited by 364
Simonsohn, U., Simmons, J. P., & Nelson, L. D. (2015) · Journal of Experimental Psychology General · doi:10.1037/xge0000104 · Cited by 343
Continuously Cumulating Meta-Analysis and Replicability
Braver, S. L., Thoemmes, F. J., & Rosenthal, R. (2014) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691614529796 · Cited by 308
What meta-analyses reveal about the replicability of psychological research.
Stanley, T. D., Carter, E. C., & Doucouliagos, H. (2018) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/bul0000169 · Cited by 307
Self-citationOn the Assessment of Monte Carlo Error in Simulation-Based Statistical Analyses
Koehler, E., Brown, E. R., & Haneuse, S. (2009) · The American Statistician · doi:10.1198/tast.2009.0030 · Cited by 303
A re‐evaluation of fixed effect(s) meta‐analysis
Rice, K., Higgins, J. P. T., & Lumley, T. (2018) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A: Statistics in Society · doi:10.1111/rssa.12275 · Cited by 287
Meta-analysis using effect size distributions of only statistically significant studies.
van Assen, M. A. L. M., van Aert, R. C. M., & Wicherts, J. M. (2015) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/met0000025 · Cited by 265
Neither fixed nor random: weighted least squares meta‐analysis
Stanley, T. D., & Doucouliagos, H. (2015) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.6481 · Cited by 258
Hedges, L. V. (1984) · Journal of Educational Statistics · doi:10.3102/10769986009001061 · Cited by 241
Limitations of PET-PEESE and Other Meta-Analysis Methods
Stanley, T. D. (2017) · Social Psychological and Personality Science · doi:10.1177/1948550617693062 · Cited by 229
Hedges, L., & Vevea, J. L. (1996) · Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics · doi:10.3102/10769986021004299 · Cited by 223
van Aert, R. C. M., Wicherts, J. M., & van Assen, M. A. L. M. (2016) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691616650874 · Cited by 219
Neither fixed nor random: weighted least squares meta‐regression
Stanley, T. D., & Doucouliagos, H. (2017) · Research Synthesis Methods · doi:10.1002/jrsm.1211 · Cited by 205
Specification Curve: Descriptive and Inferential Statistics on All Reasonable SpecificationsPreprint
Simonsohn, U., Simmons, J. P., & Nelson, L. D. (2015) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.2694998 · Cited by 200
van Elk, M., Matzke, D., Gronau, Q. F., Guan, M., Vandekerckhove, J., & Wagenmakers, E. (2015) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01365 · Cited by 197
Conceptualizing and evaluating the replication of research results
Fabrigar, L. R., & Wegener, D. T. (2015) · Journal of Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2015.07.009 · Cited by 168
Sample size in psychological research over the past 30 years
Marszalek, J. M., Barber, C., Kohlhart, J., & Cooper, B. H. (2011) · Perceptual and Motor Skills · doi:10.2466/03.11.pms.112.2.331-348 · Cited by 167
Hilgard, J., Engelhardt, C. R., & Rouder, J. N. (2017) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/bul0000074 · Cited by 162
Self-citationDetecting and adjusting for small‐study effects in meta‐analysis
Rücker, G., Carpenter, J. R., & Schwarzer, G. (2011) · Biometrical Journal · doi:10.1002/bimj.201000151 · Cited by 132
Stanley, D., & Spence, J. (2014) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691614528518 · Cited by 131
Finding the power to reduce publication bias
Stanley, T. D., Doucouliagos, H., & Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2017) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.7228 · Cited by 131
Underreporting in Psychology Experiments
Franco, A., Malhotra, N. A., & Simonovits, G. (2015) · Social Psychological and Personality Science · doi:10.1177/1948550615598377 · Cited by 119
Correcting for Publication Bias in a Meta-Analysis with the P-uniform* MethodPreprint
van Aert, R. C. M., & van Assen, M. A. L. M. (2018) · doi:10.31222/osf.io/zqjr9 · Cited by 108
Distributions of p -values smaller than .05 in psychology: what is going on?
Hartgerink, C. H. J., van Aert, R. C. M., Nuijten, M. B., Wicherts, J. M., & van Assen, M. A. L. M. (2016) · PeerJ · doi:10.7717/peerj.1935 · Cited by 90
Boulesteix, A., Wilson, R., & Hapfelmeier, A. (2017) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/s12874-017-0417-2 · Cited by 85
A Bayesian approach to mitigation of publication bias
Guan, M., & Vandekerckhove, J. (2015) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/s13423-015-0868-6 · Cited by 63
A Likelihood-Based Sensitivity Analysis for Publication Bias in Meta-Analysis
Copas, J. B. (2012) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C (Applied Statistics) · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9876.2012.01049.x · Cited by 41
Meta‐analysis inside and outside particle physics: two traditions that should converge?
Baker, R., & Jackson, D. (2012) · Research Synthesis Methods · doi:10.1002/jrsm.1065 · Cited by 39
A Monte Carlo Analysis of Alternative Meta-Analysis Estimators in the Presence of Publication Bias
Reed, W. R. (2015) · Economics · doi:10.5018/economics-ejournal.ja.2015-30 · Cited by 39
van Erp, S., Verhagen, J., Grasman, R. P. P. P., & Wagenmakers, E. (2017) · PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/myu9c · Cited by 27
A Bayesian “Fill-In” Method for Correcting for Publication Bias in Meta-Analysis
Du, H., Liu, F., & Wang, L.-J. (2017) · Psychological methods · doi:10.1037/met0000164 · Cited by 24
Jackson, D. (2007) · Biometrics · doi:10.1111/j.1541-0420.2006.00663.x · Cited by 23
Eyo (2012) · American Journal of Applied Sciences · doi:10.3844/ajassp.2012.1512.1517 · Cited by 18
A Simple, Principled Approach to Combining Evidence From Meta-Analysis and High-Quality Replications
Carter, E. C., & McCullough, M. E. (2018) · Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/2515245918756858 · Cited by 12
Self-citationHeterogeneity: multiplicative, additive or both?
Schmid, C. H. (2016) · Research Synthesis Methods · doi:10.1002/jrsm.1223 · Cited by 5
Dissertation R.C.M. van AertPreprint
van Aert, R. C. M. (2018) · MetArXiv (OSF Preprints) · doi:10.31222/osf.io/eqhjd · Cited by 3
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Augusteijn H. E. M., 2019, Q, 24, 116
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Lakens, D. (2022) · Collabra Psychology · doi:10.1525/collabra.33267 · Cited by 1,962
The gamification of learning: a meta-analysis
Sailer, M., & Homner, L. (2020) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-019-09498-w · Cited by 2,594
Simulation-Based Learning in Higher Education: A Meta-Analysis
Chernikova, O., Heitzmann, N., Stadler, M., Holzberger, D., Seidel, T., & Fischer, F. (2020) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/0034654320933544 · Cited by 1,072
Replicability, Robustness, and Reproducibility in Psychological Science
Nosek, B. A., Hardwicke, T. E., Moshontz, H., Allard, A., Corker, K. S., Dreber, A., Fidler, F., Hilgard, J., Kline Struhl, M., Nuijten, M. B., et al. (2022) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-020821-114157 · Cited by 770
Self-citationIs bilingualism associated with enhanced executive functioning in adults? A meta-analytic review.
Lehtonen, M., Soveri, A., Laine, A., Järvenpää, J., de Bruin, A., & Antfolk, J. (2018) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/bul0000142 · Cited by 711
Metadata
- Authors
- Carter, E. C., Schönbrodt, F. D., Gervais, W. M., & Hilgard, J.
- Affiliations
- DEVCOM Army Research Laboratory (US)
- Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (DE)
- University of Kentucky (US)
- Illinois State University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Carter, Evan C.
- Venue
- Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2019-06
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 115-144
- ISSN
- 2515-2459 (ISSN-L)
- 2515-2467
- OpenAlex
- W2781957993
- Cited by
- 588
- References
- 76
- Citations by year
- 2026: 43 · 2025: 60 · 2024: 69 · 2023: 86 · 2022: 83 · 2021: 87 · 2020: 79 · 2019: 54
- FWCI
- 50.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Locations
- Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science (publishedVersion)
- PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Psychology Research and Bibliometrics
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
- Keywords
- publication bias, questionable research practices, effect size overestimation, meta-analytic methods, sensitivity analysis, heterogeneity, simulation study, pre-registered replication
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
