Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Meta-analysis of raw mean differences.

Charles F Bond1, Wyndy L Wiitala, F Dan Richard

  • 1Department of Psychology, Texas Christian University, Fort Worth, TX 76129, USA. c.bond@tcu.edu

Psychological Methods
|December 11, 2003
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Facility-level program components leading to population impact: a coincidence analysis of obesity treatment options within the Veterans Health Administration.

Translational behavioral medicine·2022
Same author

Using Veterans Affairs Corporate Data Warehouse to identify 30-day hospital readmissions.

Health services & outcomes research methodology·2022
Same author

Interpretability, credibility, and usability of hospital-specific template matching versus regression-based hospital performance assessments; a multiple methods study.

BMC health services research·2022
Same author

Predicting social relations model effects from conditional expectations.

Psychological methods·2022
Same author

Endoscopist-directed sedation rarely fails: implications for the value of anesthesia assistance for routine GI endoscopy.

The American journal of managed care·2021
Same author

Hospital-specific Template Matching for Benchmarking Performance in a Diverse Multihospital System.

Medical care·2021
Same journal

Bayesian evaluation for latent variable models: A tutorial on computing information criteria and bayes factors with the r package bleval.

Psychological methods·2026
Same journal

A stochastic block prior for clustering in graphical models.

Psychological methods·2026
Same journal

Three-level vector autoregressive models.

Psychological methods·2026
Same journal

Scaling cognitive modeling to big data: A deep learning approach to studying individual differences in evidence accumulation model parameters.

Psychological methods·2026
Same journal

Best practices in multilevel modeling for within-cluster group comparisons: An evaluation of coding strategies reflecting group composition and heterogeneity.

Psychological methods·2026
Same journal

A unified framework for psychometrics in experimental psychology: The standardized generalized hierarchical factor model.

Psychological methods·2026
See all related articles

This study advocates for meta-analysis using raw mean differences, offering a clear metric for psychological effects. It details statistical methods and graphical tools for effect size analysis, highlighting limitations of standardized approaches.

Area of Science:

  • Psychology
  • Statistics
  • Research Methodology

Background:

  • Meta-analysis is crucial for synthesizing research findings.
  • Standardized mean differences are commonly used but have limitations.
  • Raw mean differences offer an alternative metric for effect sizes.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To present a rationale for using raw mean differences in meta-analysis.
  • To compare raw mean differences with standardized mean differences.
  • To describe statistical techniques for raw meta-analysis.

Main Methods:

  • Discussion of the rationale for raw metric accumulation.
  • Comparison of raw and standardized mean differences.
  • Description of statistical techniques, including a graphical decomposition device.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

  • Raw mean differences provide a valid metric for psychological effects.
  • Limitations of standardization are identified.
  • Illustrative data sets analyzed using raw meta-analysis techniques.

Conclusions:

  • Raw mean differences are a valuable alternative for meta-analysis in psychology.
  • The proposed statistical techniques enhance the analysis of effect sizes.
  • This approach addresses some limitations inherent in standardized metrics.