Quantitative research synthesis methods can be used to examine theoretical models for substantive research questions. Model-driven syntheses can address more complex questions than have typically been addressed in quantitative reviews in a more systematic and organized manner than in a traditional narrative review. A rationale and set of objectives for syntheses involving models are reviewed. The author describes how to incorporate models into each stage of a review, outlining problems and limitations that may arise at each stage. Examples from several model-driven syntheses illustrate the points made in the article.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Becker, B. J.
(1991). Quality and credibility in research reviews: What the editors say. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 267–272.
2.
Becker, B. J.
(1992a). Models of science achievement: Factors affecting male and female performance in school science. In T. D. Cook, H. M.Cooper, D. S.Cordray, L. V.Hedges, H.Hartmann, R. J.Light, T. A. Louis, & F. Mosteller (Eds.), Meta-analysis for explanation: A casebook (pp. 209–281). New York: Russell Sage.
3.
Becker, B. J.
(1992b). Using results from replicated studies to estimate linear models. Journal of Educational Statistics, 17, 341–362.
4.
Becker, B. J.
(1996). The generalizability of empirical research results. In C. P. Benbow & D. Lubinski (Eds.), Intellectual talent: Psychometric and social issues (pp. 362–383). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
5.
Becker, B. J.
(2000). Multivariate meta-analysis. In H.E.A. Tinsley & S. Brown (Eds.), Handbook of applied and multivariate statistics and mathematical modeling (pp. 499–525). San Diego: Academic Press.
6.
Becker, B. J.
, & Hedges, L. V. (1984). Meta-analysis of cognitive gender differences: A comment on an analysis by Rosenthal and Rubin. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 583–587.
7.
Becker, B. J.
, & Schram, C. M. (1994). Examining explanatory models through research synthesis. In H. M. Cooper & L. V. Hedges (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis (pp. 357–381). New York: Russell Sage.
8.
Brown, S. A.
(1988). Effects of educational interventions in diabetes care: A meta-analysis of findings. Nursing Research, 37, 223–230.
9.
Brown, S. A.
(1990). Studies of educational interventions and outcomes in diabetic adults: A meta-analysis revisited. Patient Education and Counseling, 16, 189–215.
10.
Brown, S. A.
, & Hedges, L. V. (1994). Predicting metabolic control in diabetes: A pilot study using meta-analysis to estimate a linear model. Nursing Research, 43, 362–368.
11.
Bullock, R. J.
, & Svyantek, D. J. (1985). Analyzing meta-analysis: Potential problems, an unsuccessful replication, and evaluation criteria. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70, 108–115.
12.
Chow, S. L.
(1987). Meta-analysis of pragmatic and theoretical research: A critique. Journal of Psychology, 121, 259–271.
13.
Cook, T. D.
(1990). The generalization of causal connections: Multiple theories in search of clear practice. In L. Sechrest, E. Perrin, & J. Bunker (Eds.), Research methodology: Strengthening causal interpretations of nonexperimental data. Washington, DC: Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS Publication No. [PHS] 9C-3454).
14.
Cook, T. D.
, & Leviton, L. (1980). Reviewing the literature: A comparison of traditional methods with meta-analysis. Journal of Personality, 48, 449–472.
15.
Cooper, H. M.
(1989). Integrating research: A guide for literature reviews. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
16.
Cordray, D. S.
(1989). Optimizing validity in program research: An elaboration of Chen and Rossi’s theory-driven approach. Evaluation and Program Planning, 12, 379–385.
17.
Craft, L. L.
, Magyar, T. M., Becker, B. J., & Feltz, D. L. (2000, June). The relationship between the CSAI-2 and athletic performance: A meta-analysis. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the North American Sport Psychology Association, San Diego, CA.
18.
Eysenck, H.
(1978). An exercise in mega-silliness. American Psychologist, 33, 517-517.
19.
Glass, G. V.
, & Smith, M. L. (1978). Reply to Eysenck. American Psychologist, 33, 517–518.
20.
Gleser, L. J.
, & Olkin, I. (1994). Stochastically dependent effect sizes. In H. M. Cooper & L. V. Hedges (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis (pp. 339–355). New York: Russell Sage.
21.
Hardy, R. J.
, & Thompson, S. G. (1998). Detecting and describing heterogeneity in meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine, 17, 841–856.
22.
Hedges, L. V.
(1986). Issues in meta-analysis. Review of Research in Education, 13, 353–398.
23.
Hedges, L. V.
, Laine, R. D., & Greenwald, R. (1994). Does money matter? A meta-analysis of studies of the effects of differential school inputs on student outcomes. Educational Researcher, 23(4), 5–14.
24.
Hedges, L. V.
, & Olkin, I. (1985). Statistical methods for meta-analysis. San Diego: Academic Press.
25.
Howe, K.
, & Eisenhart, M. (1990). Standards for qualitative (and quantitative) research: A prolegomenon. Educational Researcher, 19(4), 2–9.
26.
Hunter, J. E.
, & Schmidt, F. L. (1990). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
27.
Jackson, G. B.
(1980). Methods of integrative reviews. Review of Educational Research, 50, 438–460.
28.
Light, R. J.
, & Pillemer, D. B. (1984). Summing up: The science of reviewing research. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
29.
Lipsey, M. W.
, & Pollard, J. A. (1989). Driving toward theory in program evaluation: More models to choose from. Evaluation and Program Planning, 12, 317–328.
30.
Martens, R.
, Vealey, R. S., & Burton, D. (1995). Competitive anxiety in sport. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics Publishers.
31.
Miller, N.
, & Carlson, M. (1990). Valid theory-testing meta-analyses further question the negative state relief model of helping. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 215–225.
32.
Miller, N.
, Lee, J. Y., & Carlson, M. (1990). The validity of inferential judgments when used in theory-testing meta-analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 335–343.
33.
Mullen, B.
, Salas, E., & Miller, N. (1991). Using meta-analysis to test theoretical hypotheses in social psychology. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 258–264.
34.
Premack, S. L.
, & Hunter, J. E. (1988). Individual unionization decisions. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 223–234.
35.
Presby, S.
(1978). Overly broad categories obscure important differences between therapies. American Psychologist, 33, 514–515.
36.
Shadish, W.
(1992). Do family and marital therapies change what people do? A meta-analysis of behavioral outcomes. In T. D. Cook, H. M. Cooper, D. S. Cordray, L. V.Hedges, H. M. Hartmann, R. J. Light, T. A. Louis, & F. Mostellar (Eds.), Meta-analysis for explanation: A casebook. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
37.
Shavelson, R. J.
, & Stern, P. (1981). Research on teachers’ pedagogical thoughts, judgments, decisions, and behavior. Review of Educational Research, 51, 455–498.
38.
Slavin, R.
(1986). Best evidence synthesis: An alternative to meta-analytic and traditional reviews. Educational Researcher, 15(1), 5–11.
39.
Timm, N. H.
(1999). A note on testing for multivariate effect sizes. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 24, 132–145.
40.
White, P. A.
(1990). Ideas about causation in philosophy and psychology. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 3–18.
41.
Whiteside, M. F.
(1996). An integrative review of the literature relevant to custody for children 5 years of age and younger. San Francisco: Statewide Office of Family Court Services, Administrative Office of the Courts, State of California.
42.
Whiteside, M. F.
, & Becker, B. J. (2000). The young child’s post-divorce adjustment: A meta-analysis with implications for parenting arrangements. Journal of Family Psychology, 14, 5–26.
