Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information on Research and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 3e

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Educational and Psychological Measurement
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Cornwell, J. M.
Right arrow Articles by Ladd, R. T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Power and Accuracy of the Schmidt and Hunter Meta-Analytic Procedures

John M. Cornwell

Tulane University

Robert T. Ladd

Department of Management University of Tennessee, Knoxville

Many Monte Carlo studies have evaluated the Schmidt and Hunter (S&H) (1977) meta-analytic procedures for combining independent correlation coefficients and their 75% rule for testing the homogeneity of variance. This study is different in using simulated data that are more typical of those data sets included in meta-analyses (Cormwell, 1989) such that sample size, effect size, degree of range restriction, measurement error, and number of correlations were simultaneously manipulated in evaluating the S&H procedures' reliability, Type I and II error, bias, and standard error. Results supported other studies which revealed that estimates of mean rho tend to be accurate even in the presence of small sample sizes, few correlations, and substantial measurement error. The power to detect variance among the rhos, however, is low in most situations; thus, the S&H procedures do not find variance among rhos when it exists (Type II error) and also have a high Type I error rate under all conditions simulated. These results are summarized in terms of the reliability of the S&H procedure in estimating mean rho and the variance of rhos.

Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 53, No. 4, 877-895 (1993)
DOI: 10.1177/0013164493053004002
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Organizational Research MethodsHome page
H. Aguinis, M. C. Sturman, and C. A. Pierce
Comparison of Three Meta-Analytic Procedures for Estimating Moderating Effects of Categorical Variables
Organizational Research Methods, January 1, 2008; 11(1): 9 - 34.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL AND BEHAVIORAL STATISTICSHome page
A. R. Hafdahl
Combining Correlation Matrices: Simulation Analysis of Improved Fixed-Effects Methods
Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, June 1, 2007; 32(2): 180 - 205.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Educational and Psychological MeasurementHome page
W. Van Den Noortgate and P. Onghena
Multilevel Meta-Analysis: A Comparison with Traditional Meta-Analytical Procedures
Educational and Psychological Measurement, October 1, 2003; 63(5): 765 - 790.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Educational and Psychological MeasurementHome page
M. Martinussen and J. F. Bjornstad
Meta-Analysis Calculations Based on Independent and Nonindependent Cases
Educational and Psychological Measurement, December 1, 1999; 59(6): 928 - 950.
[Abstract] [PDF]