An Empirical Comparison of Meta-Analytic and Traditional Reviews
- 1 June 1991
- journal article
- research article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
- Vol. 17 (3) , 252-257
- https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167291173003
Abstract
The quality of traditional reviews was compared with that of meta-analytic reviews. Articles were coded to provide information on several aspects of the review process. These included selection of primary studies, representation of the results from the primary studies, and interpretation of results. Reviews were sampled for the periods 1981-1983 and 1987-1988, allowing comparison between the two types of reviews within each sample and a comparison between samples. The data provided useful information related to whether one review process was superior to the other. Overall meta-analyses fared very well and appear to be the preferable method.Keywords
This publication has 15 references indexed in Scilit:
- Literature-Searching Strategies of Integrative Research ReviewersKnowledge, 1986
- Analyzing meta-analysis: Potential problems, an unsuccessful replication, and evaluation criteria.Journal of Applied Psychology, 1985
- Fifteen Years of Foot-in-the Door ResearchPersonality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 1983
- What differentiates meta-analysis from other forms of review1Journal of Personality, 1981
- On quantitative reviewing1Journal of Personality, 1981
- Reviewing the literature: A comparison of traditional methods with meta-analysisJournal of Personality, 1980
- Methods for Integrative ReviewsReview of Educational Research, 1980
- The robust beauty of improper linear models in decision making.American Psychologist, 1979
- Meta-Analysis of Research on Class Size and AchievementEducational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 1979
- Primary, Secondary, and Meta-Analysis of ResearchEducational Researcher, 1976