This study investigates the small-sample performance of meta-regression methods for detecting and estimating genuine empirical effects in research literatures tainted by publication selection. Publication selection exists when editors, reviewers or researchers have a preference for statistically significant results. Meta-regression methods are found to be robust against publication selection. Even if a literature is dominated by large and unknown misspecification biases, precision-effect testing and joint precision-effect/meta-significance testing can provide viable strategies for detecting genuine empirical effects. Publication biases are greatly reduced by combining two biased estimates, the estimated meta-regression coefficient on precision (1/Se) and the unadjusted average effect.
History
Pagination
1-35
Language
eng
Notes
School working paper (Deakin University. School of Accounting, Economics and Finance) ; 2006/20
This study investigates the small-sample performance of meta-regression methods for detecting and estimating genuine empirical effects in research literatures tainted by publication selection. Publication selection exists when editors, reviewers or researchers have a preference for statistically significant results. Meta-regression methods are found to be robust against publication selection. Even if a literature is dominated by large and unknown misspecification biases, precision-effect testing and joint precision-effect/meta-significance testing can provide viable strategies for detecting genuine empirical effects. Publication biases are greatly reduced by combining two biased estimates, the estimated meta-regression coefficient on precision (1/Se) and the unadjusted average effect.
Publication classification
CN.1 Other journal article
Copyright notice
2006, The Authors
Publisher
Deakin University, School of Accounting, Economics and Finance
Place of publication
Geelong, Vic.
Series
School Working Paper - Economics Series 2006 ; SWP 2006/20