The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
On the meta-analysis of response ratios for studies with correlated and multi-group designs
Abstract
A common effect size metric used to quantify the outcome of experiments for ecological meta-analysis is the response ratio (RR): the log proportional change in the means of a treatment and control group. Estimates of the variance of RR are also important for meta-analysis because they serve as weights when effect sizes are averaged and compared. The variance of an effect size is typically a function of sampling error; however, it can also be influenced by study design. Here, I derive new variances and covariances for RR for several often-encountered experimental designs: when the treatment and control means are correlated; when multiple treatments have a common control; when means are based on repeated measures; and when the study has a correlated factorial design, or is multivariate. These developments are useful for improving the quality of data extracted from studies for meta-analysis and help address some of the common challenges meta-analysts face when quantifying a diversity of experimental designs with the response ratio.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Distribution Theory for Glass's Estimator of Effect Size and Related Estimators
Hedges, L. V. (1981) · Journal of Educational Statistics · doi:10.2307/1164588 · Cited by 5,695
The meta-analysis of response ratios in experimental ecology
Hedges, L. V., Gurevitch, J., & Curtis, P. S. (1999) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/0012-9658(1999)080[1150:tmaorr]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 4,704
A survey of the statistical power of research in behavioral ecology and animal behavior
Jennions, M. D. (2003) · Behavioral Ecology · doi:10.1093/beheco/14.3.438 · Cited by 278
Cited by
Methodological issues and advances in biological meta-analysis
Nakagawa, S., & Santos, E. S. A. (2012) · Evolutionary Ecology · doi:10.1007/s10682-012-9555-5 · Cited by 1,032
Diversification practices reduce organic to conventional yield gap
Ponisio, L. C., M'Gonigle, L. K., Mace, K. C., Palomino, J., de Valpine, P., & Kremen, C. (2015) · Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.2014.1396 · Cited by 871
Parry, D. A., Davidson, B. I., Sewall, C. J. R., Fisher, J. T., Mieczkowski, H., & Quintana, D. S. (2021) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-021-01117-5 · Cited by 793
The impact of hunting on tropical mammal and bird populations
Benítez-López, A., Alkemade, R., Schipper, A. M., Ingram, D. J., Verweij, P. A., Eikelboom, J. A. J., & Huijbregts, M. A. J. (2017) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aaj1891 · Cited by 663
Global meta-analysis reveals no net change in local-scale plant biodiversity over time
Vellend, M., Baeten, L., Myers-Smith, I. H., Elmendorf, S. C., Beauséjour, R., Brown, C. D., De Frenne, P., Verheyen, K., & Wipf, S. (2013) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1312779110 · Cited by 628
Metadata
- Authors
- Lajeunesse, M. J.
- Venue
- Ecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2011-11
- Volume
- 92
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 2049-2055
- ISSN
- 0012-9658 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2080255336
- Cited by
- 432
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 1.76
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: On the meta-analysis of response ratios for studies with correlated and multi-group designs. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1890/11-0423.1
- The paper
- Lajeunesse, M. J. (2011). On the meta-analysis of response ratios for studies with correlated and multi-group designs. Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1890/11-0423.1
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
