A Meta-analysis of the Relation Between Math Anxiety and Math Achievement

Meta-analyses from the 1990s have previously established a significant, small-to-moderate, and negative correlation between math achievement and math anxiety. Since these publications, research has continued to investigate this relation with more diverse samples and measures. Thus, the goal of the present meta-analysis was to provide an update of the math anxiety-math achievement relation and its moderators. Analyzing 747 effect sizes accumulated from research conducted between 1992 and 2018, we found a small-to-moderate, negative, and statistically significant correlation (r = -.28) between math anxiety and math achievement. The relation was significant for all moderator subgroups, with the exception of the relation between math anxiety and assessments measuring the approximate number system. Grade level, math ability level, adolescent/adult math anxiety scales, math topic of anxiety scale, and math assessments were significant moderators of this relation. There is also a tendency for published studies to report significantly stronger correlations than unpublished studies but, overall, large, negative effect sizes are under-reported. Our results are consistent with previous findings of a significant relation between math anxiety and math achievement. This association starts in childhood, remains significant through adulthood, is smaller for students in grades 3 through 5 and postsecondary school, is larger for math anxiety than for statistics anxiety and for certain math anxiety scales, and is smaller for math exam grades and samples selected for low math ability. This work supports future research efforts to determine effective math achievement and math anxiety interventions, which may be most helpful to implement during childhood.

Download Full-text

Variability in the Results of Meta-Analysis as a Function of Comparing Effect Sizes Based on Scores From Noncomparable Measures: A Simulation Study

Educational and Psychological Measurement ◽

10.1177/0013164416654517 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 77 (3) ◽

pp. 449-470 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

William R. Nugent

Keyword(s):

Fixed Effects ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Monte Carlo Study ◽

Significant Degree ◽

Effect Sizes ◽

Future Research ◽

Placebo Condition ◽

Methodological Advance ◽

Meta Analyses ◽

Observed Score

Meta-analysis is a significant methodological advance that is increasingly important in research synthesis. Fundamental to meta-analysis is the presumption that effect sizes, such as the standardized mean difference (SMD), based on scores from different measures are comparable. It has been argued that population observed score SMDs based on scores from different measures A and B will be equal only if the conjunction of three conditions are met: construct equivalence (CE), equal reliabilities (ER), and the absence of differential test functioning (DTF) in all subpopulations of the combined populations of interest. It has also been speculated the results of a meta-analysis of SMDs might differ between circumstances in which the SMDs included in a meta-analysis are based on measures which all met the conjunction of these conditions and that in which the conjunction of these conditions is violated. No previous studies have tested this conjecture. This Monte Carlo study investigated this hypothesis. A population of studies comparing one of five hypothetical treatments with a placebo condition was simulated. The SMDs in these simulated studies were based on true scores from six hypothetical measures. The scores from some of these measures met the conjunction of CE, ER, and, the absence of DTF, while others failed to meet CE. Three meta-analyses were conducted using both fixed effects and random effects methods. The results suggested that the results of meta-analyses can vary to a practically significant degree when the SMDs were based on scores from measures failing to meet the CE condition. Implications for future research are considered.

Download Full-text

The Relationship between Family Violence and Self-Control in Adolescence: A Multi-Level Meta-Analysis

10.20944/preprints201809.0328.v1 ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

Yayouk E. Willems ◽

Jian-bin Li ◽

Anne M. Hendriks ◽

Meike Bartels ◽

Catrin Finkenauer

Keyword(s):

Family Violence ◽

Statistical Power ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Self Control ◽

Effect Sizes ◽

Future Research ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Multi Level ◽

Meta Analyses ◽

Low Self Control

Theoretical studies propose an association between family violence and low self-control in adolescence, yet empirical findings of this association are inconclusive. The aim of the present research was to systematically summarize available findings on the relation between family violence and self-control across adolescence. We included 27 studies with 143 effect sizes, representing more than 25,000 participants of eight countries from early to late adolescence. Applying a multi-level meta-analyses, taking dependency between effect sizes into account while retaining statistical power, we examined the magnitude and direction of the overall effect size. Additionally, we investigated whether theoretical moderators (e.g., age, gender, country), and methodological moderators (cross-sectional/longitudinal, informant) influenced the magnitude of the association between family violence and self-control. Our results revealed that family violence and self-control have a small to moderate significant negative association (r = -.191). This association did not vary across gender, country, and informants. The strength of the association, however, decreased with age and in longitudinal studies. This finding provides evidence that researchers and clinicians may expect low self-control in the wake of family violence, especially in early adolescence. Recommendations for future research in the area are discussed.

Download Full-text

The anatomy of an award-winning meta-analysis: Recommendations for authors, reviewers, and readers of meta-analytic reviews

Journal of International Business Studies ◽

10.1057/s41267-020-00385-z ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Piers Steel ◽

Sjoerd Beugelsdijk ◽

Herman Aguinis

Keyword(s):

Meta Analysis ◽

Effect Sizes ◽

Future Research ◽

Research Directions ◽

Outlier Identification ◽

Business Studies ◽

Award Winning ◽

Future Research Directions ◽

Meta Analyses ◽

Highly Cited

AbstractMeta-analyses summarize a field’s research base and are therefore highly influential. Despite their value, the standards for an excellent meta-analysis, one that is potentially award-winning, have changed in the last decade. Each step of a meta-analysis is now more formalized, from the identification of relevant articles to coding, moderator analysis, and reporting of results. What was exemplary a decade ago can be somewhat dated today. Using the award-winning meta-analysis by Stahl et al. (Unraveling the effects of cultural diversity in teams: A meta-analysis of research on multicultural work groups. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(4):690–709, 2010) as an exemplar, we adopted a multi-disciplinary approach (e.g., management, psychology, health sciences) to summarize the anatomy (i.e., fundamental components) of a modern meta-analysis, focusing on: (1) data collection (i.e., literature search and screening, coding), (2) data preparation (i.e., treatment of multiple effect sizes, outlier identification and management, publication bias), (3) data analysis (i.e., average effect sizes, heterogeneity of effect sizes, moderator search), and (4) reporting (i.e., transparency and reproducibility, future research directions). In addition, we provide guidelines and a decision-making tree for when even foundational and highly cited meta-analyses should be updated. Based on the latest evidence, we summarize what journal editors and reviewers should expect, authors should provide, and readers (i.e., other researchers, practitioners, and policymakers) should consider about meta-analytic reviews.

Download Full-text

Meta-Analysis of the Effect of Red on Perceived Attractiveness

Evolutionary Psychology ◽

10.1177/1474704918802412 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 16 (4) ◽

pp. 147470491880241 ◽

Cited By ~ 8

Author(s):

Gabrielle K. Lehmann ◽

Andrew J. Elliot ◽

Robert J. Calin-Jageman

Keyword(s):

Meta Analysis ◽

Effect Sizes ◽

Future Research ◽

Meta Analyses ◽

Heterosexual Attraction ◽

Substantial Heterogeneity ◽

Over Time ◽

Perceived Attractiveness

We conducted meta-analyses of studies that test the red-romance hypothesis, which is that the color red enhances heterosexual attraction in romantic contexts. For men rating women, we found a small, statistically significant effect ( d = 0.26 [0.12, 0.40], p = .0004, N = 2,961), with substantial heterogeneity, Q(44) = 172.5, pQ < .0001, I2 = 89% [82, 94], and equivocal results regarding the possibility of upward bias in the estimate. For women rating men, we found a very small effect ( d = 0.13 [0.01, 0.25], p = .03, N = 2,739), with substantial heterogeneity, Q(35) = 73.0, pQ = .0002, I2 = 53% [33, 80], and evidence of upward bias in the estimate. Moderator analyses suggest effect sizes may have declined over time (both genders), may be largest when an original shade of red is used (men only), and may be smaller in preregistered studies (women only). We present contrasting interpretations and suggestions for future research.

Download Full-text

Comorbidity of Obsessive-Compulsive and Psychotic Experiences: A systematic review and meta-analysis

10.31234/osf.io/q539g ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Lauren Mawn ◽

Thomas Campbell ◽

Charlotte Aynsworth ◽

Helen Beckwith ◽

Anna Luce ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Psychotic Disorders ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Effect Sizes ◽

Future Research ◽

Obsessive Compulsive ◽

Compulsive Disorder ◽

Current Review ◽

Pooled Prevalence ◽

Meta Analyses ◽

Symptom Criteria

BACKGROUND: Comorbidity between obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD) and psychotic disorders has long been a subject of interest and speculation, with much overlap being reported. The current review seeks to: (1) Investigate the prevalence of co-occurring OCD and psychosis, reporting pooled prevalence rates; and (2) Explore variability in reported rates on the basis of categorical and/or dimensional classifications of OCD and psychosis and (3) explore potential moderators of variability. METHOD: A systematic search was performed of key databases (Embase, PSYCHInfo, MEDLINE, Scopus) from January 1988 to October 2017. Included in the meta-analyses were studies that reported adult (18+) prevalence of comorbid OCD, obsessional compulsive symptoms (OCS) and psychosis-related disorders. RESULTS: 94 articles with 103 effect sizes were extracted. Overall, when using categorical diagnoses the prevalence rate of comorbid OCD and psychotic disorder was 12% (n=155649; k= 81; 95% CI=9-15%). Using diagnostic plus symptom criteria, the prevalence was 24% (n=9563; k = 46, 95% CI=20-28%).CONCLUSION: Given the substantial co-occurrence, it is important that individuals presenting in routine clinical practice are assessed for both disorders. To advance understanding, future research must go beyond comorbidity to explore latent dimensions that may account for their development and/or maintenance (e.g., trauma).

Download Full-text

Sex Differences in Trust and Trustworthiness - A Meta-Analysis of the Trust Game and the Gift-Exchange Game

10.31234/osf.io/5zbja ◽

2018 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Olmo Van den Akker ◽

Marcel A. L. M. van Assen ◽

mark van vugt ◽

Jelte M. Wicherts

Keyword(s):

Sex Differences ◽

Sex Difference ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Gift Exchange ◽

Effect Sizes ◽

Trust Game ◽

Future Research ◽

Analytic Review ◽

The Gift ◽

Meta Analyses

Do men and women differ in trusting behavior? This question is directly relevant to social, economic, and political domains, yet the answer remains elusive. In this paper, we present a meta-analytic review of the literature on sex differences in the trust game and a variant, the gift-exchange game. Informed by both evolutionary and cultural perspectives, we predicted men to be more trusting and women to be more trustworthy in these games. The trust game meta-analyses encompass 77 papers yielding 174 effect sizes based on 17,082 participants from 23 countries, while the gift-exchange game meta-analyses covered 15 papers reporting 35 effect sizes based on 1,362 participants from 19 countries. In the trust game, we found men to be more trusting than women, g = 0.22, but we found no significant sex difference in trustworthiness, g = 0.09. In the gift-exchange game we found no significant sex difference in trust, g = 0.15, yet we did find that men are more trustworthy than women, g = 0.33. The results of the meta-analyses show that the behavior in both games is inconsistent. It seems that when monetary transfers are multiplied men behave more cooperatively than women, but that there are no sex differences when such a multiplier is absent. This “male multiplier effect” is consistent with an evolutionary account emphasizing men’s historical role as resource provider. However, future research needs to substantiate this effect and provide a theoretical framework to explain it.

Download Full-text

The Orchard Plot: Cultivating a Forest Plot for Use in Ecology, Evolution and Beyond

10.32942/osf.io/epqa7 ◽

2019 ◽

Author(s):

Shinichi Nakagawa ◽

Malgorzata Lagisz ◽

Rose E O'Dea ◽

Joanna Rutkowska ◽

Yefeng Yang ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Meta Analysis ◽

R Package ◽

Effect Sizes ◽

Forest Plot ◽

Point Estimates ◽

Aggregate Effect ◽

The Individual ◽

Meta Analyses ◽

Heterogeneous Effect ◽

Intuitive Interpretation

‘Classic’ forest plots show the effect sizes from individual studies and the aggregate effect from a meta-analysis. However, in ecology and evolution meta-analyses routinely contain over 100 effect sizes, making the classic forest plot of limited use. We surveyed 102 meta-analyses in ecology and evolution, finding that only 11% use the classic forest plot. Instead, most used a ‘forest-like plot’, showing point estimates (with 95% confidence intervals; CIs) from a series of subgroups or categories in a meta-regression. We propose a modification of the forest-like plot, which we name the ‘orchard plot’. Orchard plots, in addition to showing overall mean effects and CIs from meta-analyses/regressions, also includes 95% prediction intervals (PIs), and the individual effect sizes scaled by their precision. The PI allows the user and reader to see the range in which an effect size from a future study may be expected to fall. The PI, therefore, provides an intuitive interpretation of any heterogeneity in the data. Supplementing the PI, the inclusion of underlying effect sizes also allows the user to see any influential or outlying effect sizes. We showcase the orchard plot with example datasets from ecology and evolution, using the R package, orchard, including several functions for visualizing meta-analytic data using forest-plot derivatives. We consider the orchard plot as a variant on the classic forest plot, cultivated to the needs of meta-analysts in ecology and evolution. Hopefully, the orchard plot will prove fruitful for visualizing large collections of heterogeneous effect sizes regardless of the field of study.

Download Full-text

Identification of and Correction for Publication Bias: Comment

10.31222/osf.io/dh87m ◽

2019 ◽

Author(s):

Amanda Kvarven ◽

Eirik Strømland ◽

Magnus Johannesson

Keyword(s):

Publication Bias ◽

False Positive ◽

Large Scale ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

False Positive Rate ◽

Effect Sizes ◽

Replication Studies ◽

Moderate Reduction ◽

Positive Rate ◽

Meta Analyses

Andrews & Kasy (2019) propose an approach for adjusting effect sizes in meta-analysis for publication bias. We use the Andrews-Kasy estimator to adjust the result of 15 meta-analyses and compare the adjusted results to 15 large-scale multiple labs replication studies estimating the same effects. The pre-registered replications provide precisely estimated effect sizes, which do not suffer from publication bias. The Andrews-Kasy approach leads to a moderate reduction of the inflated effect sizes in the meta-analyses. However, the approach still overestimates effect sizes by a factor of about two or more and has an estimated false positive rate of between 57% and 100%.

Download Full-text

A protocol for the systematic review and meta-analysis of thigmotactic behaviour in the open field test in rodent models associated with persistent pain

BMJ Open Science ◽

10.1136/bmjos-2020-100135 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 5 (1) ◽

pp. e100135

Author(s):

Xue Ying Zhang ◽

Jan Vollert ◽

Emily S Sena ◽

Andrew SC Rice ◽

Nadia Soliman

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Outcome Measure ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Persistent Pain ◽

Effect Sizes ◽

Bias Assessment ◽

Animal Pain ◽

Trim And Fill ◽

Meta Analyses ◽

The Impact

ObjectiveThigmotaxis is an innate predator avoidance behaviour of rodents and is enhanced when animals are under stress. It is characterised by the preference of a rodent to seek shelter, rather than expose itself to the aversive open area. The behaviour has been proposed to be a measurable construct that can address the impact of pain on rodent behaviour. This systematic review will assess whether thigmotaxis can be influenced by experimental persistent pain and attenuated by pharmacological interventions in rodents.Search strategyWe will conduct search on three electronic databases to identify studies in which thigmotaxis was used as an outcome measure contextualised to a rodent model associated with persistent pain. All studies published until the date of the search will be considered.Screening and annotationTwo independent reviewers will screen studies based on the order of (1) titles and abstracts, and (2) full texts.Data management and reportingFor meta-analysis, we will extract thigmotactic behavioural data and calculate effect sizes. Effect sizes will be combined using a random-effects model. We will assess heterogeneity and identify sources of heterogeneity. A risk-of-bias assessment will be conducted to evaluate study quality. Publication bias will be assessed using funnel plots, Egger’s regression and trim-and-fill analysis. We will also extract stimulus-evoked limb withdrawal data to assess its correlation with thigmotaxis in the same animals. The evidence obtained will provide a comprehensive understanding of the strengths and limitations of using thigmotactic outcome measure in animal pain research so that future experimental designs can be optimised. We will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses reporting guidelines and disseminate the review findings through publication and conference presentation.

Download Full-text

Updated systematic review and meta-analysis of studies examining the relationship between reported racism and health and well-being for children and youth: a protocol

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-043722 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (6) ◽

pp. e043722

Author(s):

Naomi Priest ◽

Kate Doery ◽

Mandy Truong ◽

Shuaijun Guo ◽

Ryan Perry ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Health Outcomes ◽

Research Policy ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Well Being ◽

Children And Youth ◽

Effect Sizes ◽

Future Research ◽

Critical Determinant ◽

Health And Well Being

IntroductionRacism is a critical determinant of health and health inequities for children and youth. This protocol aims to update the first systematic review conducted by Priest et al (2013), including a meta-analysis of findings. Based on previous empirical data, it is anticipated that child and youth health will be negatively impacted by racism. Findings from this review will provide updated evidence of effect sizes across outcomes and identify moderators and mediators of relationships between racism and health.Methods and analysisThis systematic review and meta-analysis will include studies that examine associations between experiences of racism and racial discrimination with health outcomes of children and youth aged 0–24 years. Exposure measures include self-reported or proxy reported systemic, interpersonal and intrapersonal racism. Outcome measures include general health and well-being, physical health, mental health, biological markers, healthcare utilisation and health behaviours. A comprehensive search of studies from the earliest time available to October 2020 will be conducted. A random effects meta-analysis will examine the average effect of racism on a range of health outcomes. Study-level moderation will test the difference in effect sizes with regard to various sample and exposure characteristics. This review has been registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews.Ethics and disseminationThis review will provide evidence for future research within the field and help to support policy and practice development. Results will be widely disseminated to both academic and non-academic audiences through peer-review publications, community summaries and presentations to research, policy, practice and community audiences.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020184055.

Download Full-text