.png){kind=icon}
返回
Continuously Cumulating Meta-Analysis and Replicability
.png){kind=icon}
OA
AI
DOI：10.1177/1745691614529796.png)
.png){kind=icon}
.png){kind=icon}
分享.png){kind=icon}
收藏
摘要
En 中文
The current crisis in scientific psychology about whether our findings are irreproducible was presaged years ago by Tversky and Kahneman (1971), who noted that even sophisticated researchers believe in the fallacious Law of Small Numbers-erroneous intuitions about how imprecisely sample data reflect population phenomena. Combined with the low power of most current work, this often leads to the use of misleading criteria about whether an effect has replicated. Rosenthal (1990) suggested more appropriate criteria, here labeled the continuously cumulating meta-analytic (CCMA) approach. For example, a CCMA analysis on a replication attempt that does not reach significance might nonetheless provide more, not less, evidence that the effect is real. Alternatively, measures of heterogeneity might show that two studies that differ in whether they are significant might have only trivially different effect sizes. We present a nontechnical introduction to the CCMA framework (referencing relevant software), and then explain how it can be used to address aspects of replicability or more generally to assess quantitative evidence from numerous studies. We then present some examples and simulation results using the CCMA approach that show how the combination of evidence can yield improved results over the consideration of single studies.
Keyword:
effect-size heterogeneity
statistical intuition
meta-analysis
replication
AI总结
对已上传原文的论文进行重点信息的提取，主要内容包括：简要概述、研究摘要、背景介绍、关键亮点、图文解析、展望与总结。
期刊
IF:
8.4
论文数:
1.5K
被引数:
1.8W
机构
引用论文
分享收藏分享收藏ESTIMATION OF EFFECT SIZE FROM A SERIES OF INDEPENDENT EXPERIMENTS从一系列独立实验中估算效应大小.png)
PSYCHOLOGICAL BULLETIN
PSYCHOLOGICAL BULLETINIF19.8
PREAI
分享收藏
查看更多内容