Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Don't Get Too Confident: Uncertainty in SDρ

  • Scott B. Morris (a1), Samuel T. McAbee (a1), Ronald S. Landis (a1) and Kristina N. Bauer (a1)

Extract

Tett, Hundley, and Christiansen (2017) raise an important issue related to meta-analysis and our frequent overinterpretation of point estimates to the diminishment of variability of the estimate. We view this as analogous to the situation in which weather forecasters communicate the likely track of hurricanes. Such predictions involve point estimates of where the center of the storm is likely to be at some future time. These point estimates can be connected to identify the most likely path of the storm. In addition to these point estimates, however, forecasters caution that we should also attend to the “cone of uncertainty.” That is, we should not focus exclusively on the point estimate to the exclusion of the errors of prediction.

Copyright

Corresponding author

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Scott B. Morris, Department of Psychology, Illinois Institute of Technology, 3105 South Dearborn, Chicago, IL 60616. E-mail: scott.morris@iit.edu

References

Hide All
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. (2009). Introduction to meta-analysis. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
Brannick, M. T., & Hall, S. M. (2003). Confidence intervals for the random-effects variance component. In Brannick, M. T. (Chair), Advances in meta-analysis. Symposium conducted at the 18th Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Orlando, FL.
Cumming, G., & Fidler, F. (2009). Confidence intervals: Better answers to better questions. Zeitschrift für Psychologie/Journal of Psychology, 217, 1526.
Evangelou, E., Ioannidis, J. P., & Patsopoulos, N. A. (2007). Uncertainty in heterogeneity estimates in meta-analyses. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 335 (7626), 914916.
Hedges, L. V., & Olkin, I. (1985). Statistical methods for meta-analysis. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Hedges, L. V., & Vevea, J. L. (1998). Fixed- and random-effects models in meta-analysis. Psychological Methods, 3, 486504.
Higgins, J., & Thompson, S. G. (2002). Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine, 21, 15391558.
Morris, S. B., Daisley, R. L., Wheeler, M., & Boyer, P. (2015). A meta-analysis of the relationship between individual assessments and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100, 520.
Oswald, F. L., & Johnson, J. W. (1998). On the robustness, bias, and stability of statistics from meta-analysis of correlation coefficients: Some initial Monte Carlo findings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 164178.
Tett, R. P., Hundley, N. A., & Christiansen, N. D. (2017). Meta-analysis and the myth of generalizability. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 10 (3), 421456.
Viechtbauer, W. (2005). Bias and efficiency of meta-analytic variance estimators in the random-effects model. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 30, 261293.
Viechtbauer, W. (2007). Confidence intervals for the amount of heterogeneity in meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine, 26, 3752.
Viechtbauer, W. (2010). Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package. Journal of Statistical Software, 36, 148.

Related content

Powered by UNSILO

Don't Get Too Confident: Uncertainty in SDρ

  • Scott B. Morris (a1), Samuel T. McAbee (a1), Ronald S. Landis (a1) and Kristina N. Bauer (a1)

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed.