Abstract
There are 2 families of statistical procedures in meta-analysis: fixed- and randomeffects procedures. They were developed for somewhat different inference goals: making inferences about the effect parameters in the studies that have been observed versus making inferences about the distribution of effect parameters in a population of studies from a random sample of studies. The authors evaluate the performance of confidence intervals and hypothesis tests when each type of statistical procedure is used for each type of inference and confirm that each procedure is best for making the kind of inference for which it was designed. Conditionally random-effects procedures (a hybrid type) are shown to have properties in between those of fixed- and random-effects procedures. The use of quantitative methods to summarize the results of several empirical research studies, or metaanalysis, is now widely used in psychology, medicine, and the social sciences. Meta-analysis usually involves describing the results of each study by means of a numerical index (an estimate of effect size, such as a correlation coefficient, a standardized mean difference, or an odds ratio) and then combining these estimates across studies to obtain a summary. Two somewhat different statistical models have been developed for inference about average effect size from a collection of studies, called the fixed-effects and random-effects models. (A third alternative, the mixedeffects model, arises in conjunction with analyses involving study-level covariates or moderator variables, which we do not consider in this article; see Hedges, 1992.) Fixed-effects models treat the effect-size parameters as fixed but unknown constants to be estimated and usually (but not necessarily) are used in conjunction with assumptions about the homogeneity of effect parameters (see, e.g., Hedges, 1982; Rosenthal & Rubin, 1982). Random-effects models treat the effectsize parameters as if they were a random sample from
Keywords
Affiliated Institutions
Related Publications
A basic introduction to fixed-effect and random-effects models for meta-analysis
There are two popular statistical models for meta-analysis, the fixed-effect model and the random-effects model. The fact that these two models employ similar sets of formulas t...
Meta-Analysis: A Comparison of Approaches
Preface Introduction Theory: Statistical Methods of Meta-Analysis Effect Sizes Families of Effect Sizes The r Family: Correlation Coefficients as Effect Sizes The d Family: Stan...
Why We (Usually) Don't Have to Worry About Multiple Comparisons
Applied researchers often find themselves making statistical inferences in settings that would seem to require multiple comparisons adjustments. We challenge the Type I error pa...
Random-Effects Meta-Analyses Are Not Always Conservative
It is widely held that random-effects summary effect estimates are more conservative than fixed-effects summaries in epidemiologic meta-analysis. This view is based on the fact ...
SISVAR: A COMPUTER ANALYSIS SYSTEM TO FIXED EFFECTS SPLIT PLOT TYPE DESIGNS
This paper presents a special capability of Sisvar to deal with fixed effect models with several restriction in the randomization procedure. These restrictions lead to models wi...
Publication Info
- Year
- 1998
- Type
- article
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 486-504
- Citations
- 2740
- Access
- Closed
External Links
Social Impact
Social media, news, blog, policy document mentions
Citation Metrics
Cite This
Identifiers
- DOI
- 10.1037/1082-989x.3.4.486