The question as to the relationship that exists between measures of self and performance/achievement has long been the focus of research endeavour. This study compares the conclusions drawn from a traditional review of literature relating to self and performance with those arising from a meta-analysis of the same area.
References
1.
AndrewsD. F., BickelP. J., HampelF. R., HuberP. J., RogersW. H., and TukeyJ. R.Robust Estimates of Location: Survey and Advances.Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1972.
2.
BledsoeJ. C.Self-concepts of children and their intelligence achievement, interests, and anxiety.Childhood Education, 1967, 43, 436–8.
3.
BrookoverW. B., and ThomasS.Self-concept of ability and school achievement.Sociology of Education, 1964, 37, 271–8.
4.
CookT. D., and LevitonL. C.Reviewing the literature: A comparison of traditional methods with meta-analysis.Journal of Personality, 1980, 48, 449–72.
5.
CronbachL. J., and FurbyL.How we should measure change — or should we?Psychological Bulletin, 1970, 74, 68–80.
6.
RogosaD.A critique of cross-lagged correlation.Psychological Bulletin, 1980, 88, 245–58.
7.
ShavelsonR. J., and BolusR.Self-concept: The interplay of theory and methods.Journal of Educational Psychology, in press.
8.
SmithM. L.Publication bias and meta-analysis.Education: An International Review Series, 1980, 4, 22–3.
9.
WestC. K., FishJ. A., and StevensJ. A.General self-concept, self-concept of academic ability and school achievement: Implications for ‘causes’ of self-concept.Australian Journal of Eduation, 1980, 24, 194–213.
10.
WylieR. C.The Self-concept: Theory and Research on Selected Topics. (Vol. 2). Lincoln, Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press, 1979.
