Meta-Analytic Choices and Judgment Calls: Implications for Theory Building and Testing, Obtained Effect Sizes, and Scholarly Impact

By Herman Aguinis, D. Dalton, Frank Bosco, C. Pierce, Catherine M. Dalton. 2011

294 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Applied Psychology, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/6f69e23d05314d815c173ba74af7b27ebd7c8cea

How researchers see this paper

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

In Applied Psychology

1. Herman Aguinis
2. Timo Busch
3. G. Friede
4. Frank Bosco
5. C. Pierce
6. James G. Field
7. T. R. Crook
8. Kulraj Singh

In Statistics and Probability

1. Herman Aguinis
2. G. Banks
3. G. Friede
4. Timo Busch
5. Kevin J. Murphy
6. James G. Field
7. Frank Bosco
8. C. Pierce

Citations in the corpus

• Correlational effect size benchmarks. (2015, methodology): “Finally, our study addresses the correlation coefficient, which is the effect size metric most frequently used and reported in the applied psychology literature (e.g., Aguinis et al., 2011).”
• The Robustness of the Corporate Social and Financial Performance Relation: A Second‐Order Meta‐Analysis (2018, methodology): “To create generalizable conclusions for the CSPCFP debate, we build on Aguinis et al. (2011) and apply a methodological strength assessment.”
• ESG and financial performance: aggregated evidence from more than 2000 empirical studies (2015, methodology): “The approach is used by more than 80% of meta-analyses in management research (Aguinis et al. 2011).”
• Meta-analytic Reviews in the Organizational Sciences: Two Meta-analytic Schools on the Way to MARS (the Meta-analytic Reporting Standards) (2013, background): “Regrettably, Aguinis et al. (2011) estimated that only 16 % of meta-analytic reviews conduct sensitivity analyses.”
• Have We Progressed Marketing Knowledge? A Meta-Meta-Analysis of Effect Sizes in Marketing Research (2015, background): “Effect sizes indicate the merit of scientific explanations and the usefulness and relevance of a scientific hypothesis and theory (Aguinis et al. 2011): the more the variance in the dependent variable is explained, the more useful and relevant the underlying theory is thought to be, and the more…”
• Competence- and Integrity-Based Trust in Interorganizational Relationships: Which Matters More? (2018, methodology): “Aguinis et al., 2010). Using scales reported by Gundlach and Cannon (2010), Zaheer et al.”