A Review of Meta-Analyses in Education

By Soyeon Ahn, Allison J. Ames, Nicholas D. Myers. 2012

162 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a49bebab65d1c872a844c780f2c9867eaab0afda

How researchers see this paper

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

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

robumeta: An R-package for robust variance estimation in meta-analysis (2015, background): “This is problematic since work by Ahn, Ames, and Myers (2012) and Polanin (2013) suggests that more than 50% of meta-analyses in psychology and education have fewer than 40 studies.”
Shared Book Reading Interventions With English Learners: A Meta-Analysis (2018, methodology): “For a meta-analysis to yield the most accurate estimate of that true outcome or effect, it is essential to address how the methodology used in the included studies may influence the effect sizes obtained (Ahn et al., 2012).”
Modeling dependent effect sizes with three-level meta-analyses: a structural equation modeling approach. (2014, background): “Ahn, Ames, and Myers (2012) reviewed 56 meta-analyses published across eight education journals between 2000 and 2010.”
Methods for dealing with multiple outcomes in meta-analysis: a comparison between averaging effect sizes, robust variance estimation and multilevel meta-analysis (2017, background): “In the review of Ahn et al. (2012), although 28 studies reported dependent effect sizes, none of these studies used multivariate meta-analysis to handle this issue, which may be a result of the lacking correlations between effects.”
Small-Sample Adjustments for Tests of Moderators and Model Fit Using Robust Variance Estimation in Meta-Regression (2015, methodology): “Additionally, we repeated the analysis using a subset of 32 studies, which Tipton and Pustejovsky 625 is a typical sample size for meta-analyses in education and the social sciences (Ahn et al., 2012; Polanin & Pigott, 2015).”
Testing Categorical Moderators in Mixed-Effects Meta-analysis in the Presence of Heteroscedasticity (2019, methodology): “Choice of values for k was based on a review of meta-analyses undertaken by Ahn, Ames, and Myers (2012) in the educational context where the first quartile, median, and third quartile of the empirical distribution of the number of studies were found to be 22, 38, and 67, respectively.”