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
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
Pagination
1-35
Publisher
Deakin University, School of Accounting, Economics and Finance
Place of publication
Geelong, Vic.
Series
School Working Paper - Economics Series 2006 ; SWP 2006/20