Publication Bias:A call for improved meta-analytic practice in the organizational sciences

By G. Banks, Sven Kepes, Michael A. McDaniel. 2012

95 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Accounting, Developmental and Educational Psychology, Information Systems and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b41582d53807d703d012a597c2422611b11225b0

How researchers see this paper

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

In Accounting

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Information Systems and Management

Citations in the corpus

A Meta-Analysis of Job Satisfaction Correlates in the Public Administration Literature (2016, background): “Banks, Kepes, and McDaniel (2012) look at the number and types of publication bias measures presented in 105 meta-analyses published between 2005 and 2010 in four top journals in the management and industrial/organizational psychology research streams.”
What does team–member exchange bring to the party? A meta‐analytic review of team and leader social exchange (2014, methodology): “Overall, the publication bias methods were largely in agreement that there is minimal evidence of bias, giving us greater confidence in the results (Banks et al., 2012).”
How Trustworthy Is the Scientific Literature in Industrial and Organizational Psychology? (2013, background): “Furthermore, Banks, Kepes, and McDaniel (2012) found evidence consistent with an inference of publication bias in the literature on conditional reasoning tests.”
A Meta-Analytic Review of Preschool Social and Emotional Learning Interventions (2020, unknown): “Follow-up analyses were conducted to assess whether publication bias detected indicated true bias, or was an artifact of extreme heterogeneity among studies (e.g., Banks et al., 2012; Borenstein, 2017).”
Advancing the social identity theory of leadership: A meta-analytic review of leader group prototypicality (2020, background): “Finally, we aim to provide a more precise understanding of the impact of leader group prototypicality on leader outcomes by providing an assessment that encompasses the entire body of existing research evidence (Cumming, 2014; Schmidt & Oh, 2016) while also exploring the potential influence of publi”
Cognitive and Affective Job Insecurity: A Meta-Analysis and a Primary Study (2018, methodology): “, X is still related to Y), publication bias is moderate (Banks et al., 2012).”
Thriving at work: A meta‐analysis (2019, methodology): “More specifically, we considered cumulative meta ‐ analysis to address whether studies with lower precision cause “ drift ” in our meta ‐ analytic estimates (see Banks, Kepes, & McDaniel, 2012, for additional details).”