James E Pustejovsky, Martyna Citkowicz, Megha Joshi
{"title":"Estimation and inference for step-function selection models in meta-analyses with dependent effects.","authors":"James E Pustejovsky, Martyna Citkowicz, Megha Joshi","doi":"10.1017/rsm.2026.10117","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Meta-analyses in social science fields face multiple methodological challenges arising from how primary research studies are designed and reported. One challenge is that many primary studies report multiple relevant effect size estimates, leading to a data structure with dependent observations. Another is selective reporting bias, which arises when the availability of study findings is influenced by the statistical significance of results. Although many selective reporting diagnostics and bias-correction methods have been proposed, few are suitable for meta-analyses involving dependent effect sizes. Among available methods, step-function selection models are conceptually appealing and have shown promise in previous simulations, but tend to understate uncertainty in parameter estimates if dependent effects are ignored. We study methods for estimating step-function models from data involving dependent effect sizes, focusing specifically on estimating parameters of the marginal distribution of effect sizes and accounting for dependence using cluster-robust variance estimation or bootstrap resampling. We describe two estimation strategies, demonstrate them by re-analyzing data from a previous synthesis on ego depletion effects, and evaluate their performance through an extensive simulation study under both univariate and multivariate selection processes. Simulation findings indicate that selection models provide low-bias estimates of average effect size and clustered bootstrap confidence intervals provide acceptable coverage levels for meta-analyses with at least 30 studies. Although unadjusted estimates are more efficient when selective reporting is absent or minimal, the proposed methods provide a robust and useful approach for evaluating the potential biases arising when selective reporting is present in meta-analyses with dependent effects.</p>","PeriodicalId":226,"journal":{"name":"Research Synthesis Methods","volume":" ","pages":"1-34"},"PeriodicalIF":8.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research Synthesis Methods","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rsm.2026.10117","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Meta-analyses in social science fields face multiple methodological challenges arising from how primary research studies are designed and reported. One challenge is that many primary studies report multiple relevant effect size estimates, leading to a data structure with dependent observations. Another is selective reporting bias, which arises when the availability of study findings is influenced by the statistical significance of results. Although many selective reporting diagnostics and bias-correction methods have been proposed, few are suitable for meta-analyses involving dependent effect sizes. Among available methods, step-function selection models are conceptually appealing and have shown promise in previous simulations, but tend to understate uncertainty in parameter estimates if dependent effects are ignored. We study methods for estimating step-function models from data involving dependent effect sizes, focusing specifically on estimating parameters of the marginal distribution of effect sizes and accounting for dependence using cluster-robust variance estimation or bootstrap resampling. We describe two estimation strategies, demonstrate them by re-analyzing data from a previous synthesis on ego depletion effects, and evaluate their performance through an extensive simulation study under both univariate and multivariate selection processes. Simulation findings indicate that selection models provide low-bias estimates of average effect size and clustered bootstrap confidence intervals provide acceptable coverage levels for meta-analyses with at least 30 studies. Although unadjusted estimates are more efficient when selective reporting is absent or minimal, the proposed methods provide a robust and useful approach for evaluating the potential biases arising when selective reporting is present in meta-analyses with dependent effects.
期刊介绍:
Research Synthesis Methods is a reputable, peer-reviewed journal that focuses on the development and dissemination of methods for conducting systematic research synthesis. Our aim is to advance the knowledge and application of research synthesis methods across various disciplines.
Our journal provides a platform for the exchange of ideas and knowledge related to designing, conducting, analyzing, interpreting, reporting, and applying research synthesis. While research synthesis is commonly practiced in the health and social sciences, our journal also welcomes contributions from other fields to enrich the methodologies employed in research synthesis across scientific disciplines.
By bridging different disciplines, we aim to foster collaboration and cross-fertilization of ideas, ultimately enhancing the quality and effectiveness of research synthesis methods. Whether you are a researcher, practitioner, or stakeholder involved in research synthesis, our journal strives to offer valuable insights and practical guidance for your work.