Averaging dependent effect sizes in meta-analysis: a cautionary note about procedures.
When a primary study includes several indicators of the same construct, the usual strategy to meta-analytically integrate the multiple effect sizes is to average them within the study. In this paper, the numerical and conceptual differences among three procedures for averaging dependent effect sizes are shown. The procedures are the simple arithmetic mean, the Hedges and Olkin (1985) procedure, and the Rosenthal and Rubin (1986) procedure. Whereas the simple arithmetic mean ignores the dependence among effect sizes, both the procedures by Hedges and Olkin and Rosenthal and Rubin take into account the correlational structure of the effect sizes, although in a different way. Rosenthal and Rubin's procedure provides the effect size for a single composite variable made up of the multiple effect sizes, whereas Hedges and Olkin's procedure presents an effect size estimate of the standard variable. The three procedures were applied to 54 conditions, where the magnitude and homogeneity of both effect sizes and correlation matrix among effect sizes were manipulated. Rosenthal and Rubin's procedure showed the highest estimates, followed by the simple mean, and the Hedges and Olkin procedure, this last having the lowest estimates. These differences are not trivial in a meta-analysis, where the aims must guide the selection of one of the procedures.
Marín-Martínez
F
F
Departamento de Psicología Básica y Metodología, Facultad de Psicología, Universidad de Murcia, Campus de Espinardo, Apdo 4021, 30080 Murcia, Spain. fulmarin@fcu.um.es
Sánchez-Meca
J
J
D003627:Data Interpretation, Statistical; D006801:Humans; D015201:Meta-Analysis as Topic; D015233:Models, Statistical