Skip to content
Prev 5281 / 5632 Next

[R-meta] errors returned by rma() and rma.mv() when fitting a large dataset

Dear Yefeng,

Since some of the mentioned methods tend not to perform well (Carter et 
al., 2019; Renkewitz & Keiner, 2019; Rodgers & Pustejovsky, 2021), you 
might also consider dropping some publication bias analyses. Using more 
methods is not necessarily more informative.

Carter, E. C., Sch?nbrodt, F. D., Gervais, W. M., & Hilgard, J. (2019). 
Correcting for Bias in Psychology: A Comparison of Meta-Analytic 
Methods. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 
2(2), 115?144. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245919847196

Renkewitz, F., & Keiner, M. (2019). How to detect publication bias in 
psychological research: A comparative evaluation of six statistical 
methods. Zeitschrift Fur Psychologie, 227(4), 261?279. 
https://doi.org/10.1027/2151-2604/a000386

Rodgers, M. A., & Pustejovsky, J. E. (2021). Evaluating meta-analytic 
methods to detect selective reporting in the presence of dependent 
effect sizes. Psychological Methods, 26(2), 141?160. 
https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000300




Best,
Lukasz
Message-ID: <db47c155-f1ab-41be-9eec-16e2186a445c@uni-osnabrueck.de>
In-Reply-To: <mailman.5285.9.1716458402.30331.r-sig-meta-analysis@r-project.org>