THE FILE‐DRAWER PROBLEM REVISITED: A GENERAL WEIGHTED METHOD FOR CALCULATING FAIL‐SAFE NUMBERS IN META‐ANALYSIS

By M. Rosenberg. Evolution; international journal of organic evolution, 2005

1,148 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Global and Planetary Change

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/58161cfe099237a276baff507b1c8c1c0a7ee9ef

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

1. Petr Pyšek
2. M. Vilà
3. D. Richardson
4. P. Hulme
5. Jan Pergl
6. V. Jarošı́k
7. C. Kremen
8. Urs Schaffner

In Global and Planetary Change

1. C. Kremen
2. R. Bommarco
3. E. J. Blitzer
4. P. Hulme
5. T. Ticktin
6. O. Gaoue
7. R. Chaplin‐Kramer
8. Jean–Marc Dewaele

Citations in the corpus

• Integrating the theory of planned behaviour and self-determination theory in health behaviour: a meta-analysis. (2009, methodology): “We also computed the ‘fail safe’ sample size (NFS) which represents the number of studies with null findings required reduce the effect size to a trivial value, in this case resulting in the confidence intervals including the value of zero (Rosenberg, 2005).”
• The Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale and Academic Achievement: An Overview of the Prevailing Literature and a Meta-analysis (2020, background): “An additional call for unpublished research was made to limit the effect of the ‘file-drawer problem’, which refers to the bias in publication regarding non-significant results (Rosenberg, 2005).”
• A cognitive approach to lie detection: A meta‐analysis (2017, background): “The fail-safeNs – the numbers of file-drawer studies with zero effects sizes needed to render the effects non-significant (Rosenberg, 2005; Rosenthal, 1979) – were comparable as well, and they indicate that publication bias is unlikely to be an issue here (certainly at the level of total accuracy).”
• Effects of biochar application on root traits: a meta‐analysis (2017, background): “GCB Bioenergy Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 9, 1563–1572 affected by the nonpublished data (Rosenberg, 2005).”
• Drought effects on damage by forest insects and pathogens: a meta‐analysis (2012, methodology): “The weighted method proposed by Rosenberg (2005) was used to calculate the fail-safe number for our dataset and this number was compared with Rosenthal’s conservative critical value of 5n + 10 (Rosenberg et al., 2000), where n is the total number of individual comparisons.”
• General quantitative genetic methods for comparative biology: phylogenies, taxonomies and multi‐trait models for continuous and categorical characters (2010, background): “In addition, the fail-safe N (file-drawer number; Rosenthal, 1979) and related statistics (e.g. Orwin, 1983; Rosenberg, 2005) have often been reported as a means of assessing the validity of mean effect size estimates in meta-analysis in evolution and ecology (Moller & Jennions, 2001), although…”
• A global meta-analysis of the ecological impacts of nonnative crayfish (2013, result): “The fail-safe number reflects the number of additional nonsignificant studies that, if included in the analysis, could change the model output from significant to nonsignificant (Rosenberg 2005).”
• Agricultural diversification promotes multiple ecosystem services without compromising yield (2020, methodology): “We then calculated Rosenberg’s fail-safe number to assess the robustness of our results to potential publication bias (38).”