Lynn and Mullen encourage hospitality researchers to avoid the Hunter and Schmidt approach to meta-analysis due to posited anomalous results and nonconformity with statistical convention. They cite Johnson, Mullen, and Salas in making said admonishment. Schmidt and Hunter have established that Johnson et al. make errors in applying the Hunter and Schmidt techniques; errors that produce the anomalous results. As such, Lynn and Mullen's statement warning hospitality researchers not to use the Hunter and Schmidt approach needs to be corrected. Hospitality researchers should not hesitate to use Hunter and Schmidt's approach. In fact, they should be encouraged to use the Hunter and Schmidt approach as it is an approach recommended by the National Research Council.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
CohenJ.(1994).The earth is round (p < .05).American Psychologist,49(12), 997–1003
2.
HedgesL. V.(1994a).Fixed effects models. In CooperH.HedgesL. V. (Eds.), Handbook of research synthesis (pp. 285–300). New York: Russell Sage
3.
HedgesL. V.(1994b).Statistical considerations. In CooperH.HedgesL. V. (Eds.), Handbook of research synthesis (pp. 29–38). New York: Russell Sage
4.
HedgesL. V.OlkinI.(1985).Statistical methods for meta-analysis.Orlando, FL: Academic Press
5.
HunterJ. E.SchmidtF. L.(1990).Methods of meta-analysis. Correcting error and bias in research findings.Newbury Park, CA: Sage
6.
HunterJ. E.SchmidtF. L.(1997).Type I error in the fixed effects formulas for meta-analysis. Unpublished manuscript, Department of Psychology, Michigan State University
7.
JohnsonB. T.MullenB.SalasE.(1995).Comparison of three meta-analytic approaches.Journal of Applied Psychology,80(1), 94–106
8.
LoftusG. R.(1996).Psychology will be much better science when we change the way we analyze data.Current Directions in Psychological Science,5(6), 161–171
9.
LoftusG. R.(1997).Psychology will be much better science when we change the way we analyze data: Erratum.Current Directions in Psychological Science,6(1), 22
10.
LynnM.MullenB.(1997).The quantitative integration of research: An introduction to meta-analysis.Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research,21(3), 121–139
11.
National Research Council.(1992).Combining information: Statistical issues and opportunities for research.Washington, DC: National Academy Press
12.
OsburnH. G.CallenderJ.(1992).A note on the sampling variance of the mean uncorrected correlation in meta-analysis and validity generalization.Journal of Applied Psychology,77(2), 115–122
13.
RaudenbushS. W.(1994).Random effects models. In CooperH.HedgesL. V. (Eds.), Handbook of research synthesis (pp. 301–322). New York: Russell Sage
14.
RosenthalR.(1991).Meta-analytic procedures for social research.Newbury Park, CA: Sage
15.
SchmidtF. L.(1992).What do data really mean? Research findings, meta-analysis, and cumulative knowledge in psychology.American Psychologist,47(10), 1173–1181
16.
SchmidtF. L.(1996).Statistical significance testing and cumulative knowledge in psychology: Implications for the training of researchers.Psychological Methods,1(2), 115–129
17.
SchmidtF. L.HunterJ. E.(1997).Comparison of three meta-analysis methods revisited: An error in Johnson, Mullen and Salas (1995). Unpublished manuscript, College of Business, University of Iowa
18.
SchmidtF. L.HunterJ. E. (in press). Eight common but false objections to the discontinuation of significance testing in the analysis of research data. In HarlowL.MulaikS. (Eds.), What if there were no significance testing?Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
19.
SchmidtF. L.HunterJ. E.RajuN. S.(1988).Validity generalization and situational specificity: A second look at the 75% rule and the Fisher's Z transformation.Journal of Applied Psychology,73(4), 665–672
20.
ShadishW. R.HaddockC. K.(1994).Combining estimates of effects size. In CooperH.HedgesL. V. (Eds.), Handbook of research synthesis (pp. 261–282). New York: Russell Sage
