A Review and Evaluation of Meta-Analysis Practices in Management Research
By Inge Geyskens, R. Krishnan, Jan-Benedict E M Steenkamp, P. V. Cunha. 2009
524 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Management Information Systems, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Strategy and Management
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/455e56c15aef53788bcc4729508a1a2c397ee3f6
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Management Information Systems
- Nripendra P. Rana
- Oliver Schilke
- Christian Schwens
- Christian Homburg
- J. Otten
- Myrto Chliova
- N. Bellé
- Petros Vourvachis
In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management
- Marc van Essen
- M. Carney
- P. Duran
- Oliver Schilke
- Herman Aguinis
- Pursey PMAR Heugens
- Eric Gedajlovic
- Mike W. Peng
In Strategy and Management
- Marc van Essen
- Oliver Schilke
- P. Duran
- Michael A. Hitt
- Eric Gedajlovic
- Mike W. Peng
- Johan Wiklund
- Pursey PMAR Heugens
Citations in the corpus
- Information Strategies and Energy Conservation Behavior: A Meta-Analysis of Experimental Studies from 1975 to 2012 (2013, unknown): “Meta-analysis methods have become widely used and cited in the economics and management literature (see for example Stanley and Jarrell (1989) Geyskens et al., 2009).”
- Team creativity/innovation in culturally diverse teams: A meta‐analysis (2019, background): “We reported two pieces of information to show the heterogeneity of an effect size and the presence of moderators (Geyskens et al., 2009): 80% credibility interval (CV; Hunter & Schmidt, 2004; Schmidt & Hunter, 2014) and the I2 value (Higgins, Thompson, Deeks, & Altman, 2003).”
- Assessing Managerial Power Theory (2015, methodology): “Following current standards in the metaanalytic literature (Geyskens et al., 2009), we used random effects estimation methods in our MARA analyses, which are more conservative than conventional fixed effects methods.”
- Meta-analytic Reviews in the Organizational Sciences: Two Meta-analytic Schools on the Way to MARS (the Meta-analytic Reporting Standards) (2013, background): “First, correlations are the most common and analyzed effect size in the organizational sciences (Aytug et al. 2011; Geyskens et al. 2009).”
- Synthesizing and Extending Resource Dependence Theory (2013, unknown): “As scholars are concerned about the inaccuracy of fixed-effects models (geyskens et al., 2009), we use a more conservative mixed-effects specification, which attributes effect size variability to systematic between-study differences, firm-level sampling error, and an unmeasured random component…”