↓ Skip to main content

Concealed correlations meta-analysis: A new method for synthesizing standardized regression coefficients

Overview of attention for article published in Behavior Research Methods, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
13 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
89 Mendeley
Title
Concealed correlations meta-analysis: A new method for synthesizing standardized regression coefficients
Published in
Behavior Research Methods, September 2018
DOI 10.3758/s13428-018-1123-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Belén Fernández-Castilla, Ariel M. Aloe, Lies Declercq, Laleh Jamshidi, Patrick Onghena, S. Natasha Beretvas, Wim Van den Noortgate

Abstract

The synthesis of standardized regression coefficients is still a controversial issue in the field of meta-analysis. The difficulty lies in the fact that the standardized regression coefficients belonging to regression models that include different sets of covariates do not represent the same parameter, and thus their direct combination is meaningless. In the present study, a new approach called concealed correlations meta-analysis is proposed that allows for using the common information that standardized regression coefficients from different regression models contain to improve the precision of a combined focal standardized regression coefficient estimate. The performance of this new approach was compared with that of two other approaches: (1) carrying out separate meta-analyses for standardized regression coefficients from studies that used the same regression model, and (2) performing a meta-regression on the focal standardized regression coefficients while including an indicator variable as a moderator indicating the regression model to which each standardized regression coefficient belongs. The comparison was done through a simulation study. The results showed that, as expected, the proposed approach led to more accurate estimates of the combined standardized regression coefficients under both random- and fixed-effect models.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 89 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 89 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 19%
Researcher 14 16%
Student > Master 11 12%
Student > Postgraduate 4 4%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 4%
Other 18 20%
Unknown 21 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 16 18%
Social Sciences 7 8%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 6 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 6%
Other 19 21%
Unknown 31 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 September 2020.
All research outputs
#4,757,025
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Behavior Research Methods
#658
of 2,526 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#87,254
of 350,625 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Behavior Research Methods
#31
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,526 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 350,625 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.