The DOI matches its Crossref record; 69 of the 71 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
How to do a meta‐analysis
Abstract
Meta‐analysis is a statistical tool for estimating the mean and variance of underlying population effects from a collection of empirical studies addressing ostensibly the same research question. Meta‐analysis has become an increasing popular and valuable tool in psychological research, and major review articles typically employ these methods. This article describes the process of conducting meta‐analysis: selecting articles, developing inclusion criteria, calculating effect sizes, conducting the actual analysis (including information on how to do the analysis on popular computer packages such as IBM SPSS and R) and estimating the effects of publication bias. Guidance is also given on how to write up a meta‐analysis.
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
“In terms of data extraction, all studies provided raw M ± SD scores apart from two55,56 where estimated marginal M ± SDs were given (raw data was requested from corresponding authors but could not be obtained).”
From Effect of breathwork on stress and mental health: A meta-analysis of randomised-controlled trials (2023) · cites this paper as [56]
In the citing paper
“Moreover, Rosenthal’s fail-safe N was calculated (to estimate how many further studies yielding zero effect would be required to make the overall ES non-significant for stress)56.”
From Effect of breathwork on stress and mental health: A meta-analysis of randomised-controlled trials (2023) · cites this paper as [56]
In the citing paper
“A random-effects model was selected as it was recommended that variability in effect sizes should be assumed in psychological research and that this model allowed generalisation of the findings beyond the studies included in the meta-analysis (Field and Gillett 2010).”
From A meta-analytic review of the efficacy of physical exercise interventions on cognition in individuals with autism spectrum disorder and ADHD (2016) · cites this paper as Field and Gillett 2010
Citations
Cites
R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing
R Core Team (2000) · doi:10.32614/r.manuals · Cited by 355,893
Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences
Muller, K. E., & Cohen, J. (1989) · Technometrics · doi:10.2307/1270020 · Cited by 99,603
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
Discovering Statistics Using SPSS
Field, A. P., & Miles, J. N. V. (2000) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 28,269
Self-citationOperating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias
Begg, C. B., & Mazumdar, M. (1994) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2533446 · Cited by 16,955
The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results.
Rosenthal, R. (1979) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.86.3.638 · Cited by 9,068
Cohen, J. (1992) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037//0033-2909.112.1.155 · Cited by 8,771
THE BIG FIVE PERSONALITY DIMENSIONS AND JOB PERFORMANCE: A META‐ANALYSIS
BARRICK, M. R., & MOUNT, M. K. (1991) · Personnel Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1991.tb00688.x · Cited by 8,689
The use of ranks to avoid the assumption of normality implicit in the analysis of variance
Friedman, M. (1937) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1937.10503522 · Cited by 7,005
Statistical Methods for Meta-Analysis.
Freeman, P. R., Hedges, L. V., & Olkin, I. (1986) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2531069 · Cited by 4,839
Research works printed but not linked: 12
- Clark‐Carter D., 2003, Effect size: The missing piece in the jigsaw, Psychologist, 16, 636
- Cochrane Collaboration, 2008, Review Manager (RevMan) for Windows: Version 5.0
- 10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155 · DOI · Paper page
- DeCoster J., 1998, Microsoft Excel spreadsheets: Meta‐analysis
- Field A. P., 2005, A handbook of research methods in clinical and health psychology, 295
- Field A. P., 2009, How to do a meta‐analysis
- Fisher R. A., 1935, The design of experiments
- 10.2307/1164832 · DOI · Paper page
- Lavesque R., 2001, Syntax: Meta‐analysis
- 10.3102/10769986008002157 · DOI · Paper page
- Schwarzer G., 2005, Meta
- Wilson D. B., 2004, A spreadsheet for calculating standardized mean difference type effect sizes
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Richardson, M., Abraham, C., & Bond, R. (2012) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0026838 · Cited by 3,646
Does low self-esteem predict depression and anxiety? A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies.
Sowislo, J. F., & Orth, U. (2013) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0028931 · Cited by 2,123
Hayes, S. A., & Watson, S. L. (2013) · Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders · doi:10.1007/s10803-012-1604-y · Cited by 1,847
Broadbent, J., & Poon, W. L. (2015) · The Internet and Higher Education · doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.04.007 · Cited by 1,692
Much ado about grit: A meta-analytic synthesis of the grit literature
Credé, M., Tynan, M. C., & Harms, P. D. (2017) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/pspp0000102 · Cited by 1,653
Metadata
- Authors
- Field, A. P., & Gillett, R.
- Affiliations
- University of Sussex (GB)
- University of Leicester (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Field, Andy P.
- Gillett, Raphael
- ORCID
- Field, Andy P.
- Venue
- British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2010-11
- Volume
- 63
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 665-694
- ISSN
- 0007-1102 (ISSN-L)
- 2044-8317
- OpenAlex
- W2094667953
- Cited by
- 1,162
- References
- 71
- Citations by year
- 2026: 99 · 2025: 136 · 2024: 115 · 2023: 117 · 2022: 102 · 2021: 84 · 2020: 74 · 2019: 73 · 2018: 78 · 2017: 63 · 2016: 57 · 2015: 63 · 2014: 41 · 2013: 35 · 2012: 14
- FWCI
- 18.49
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Figshare (submittedVersion)
- Leicester Research Archive (University of Leicester) (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 in Epidemiology
- Keywords
- meta-analysis, effect size, publication bias, inclusion criteria, article selection, meta-analysis software
- MeSH terms
- Computer Simulation, Data Collection, Humans, Mathematical Computing, Psychology, Research, Software, Meta-Analysis as Topic, Effect Modifier, Epidemiologic, Publication Bias
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
