外部效度和Meta分析

IF 5 1区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Tara Slough, Scott A. Tyson
{"title":"外部效度和Meta分析","authors":"Tara Slough,&nbsp;Scott A. Tyson","doi":"10.1111/ajps.12742","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Meta-analysis is a method that combines estimates from studies conducted on different samples, in different contexts, or at different times. Social scientists increasingly use meta-analyses to aggregate evidence and learn about general substantive phenomena. We develop a framework to examine the theoretical foundations of meta-analysis, with emphasis on clarifying the role of external validity. We identify the conditions under which multiple studies are target-equivalent, meaning they identify the same empirical target. Our main result shows that external validity and harmonization, in comparisons made and how outcomes are measured, are necessary and sufficient for target-equivalence. We examine common formulations of meta-analysis—fixed- and random-effects models—developing the theoretical assumptions that underpin them and providing design-based identification results for these models. We then provide practical guidance based on our framework and results. Our results reveal limits to agnostic approaches to the combination of causal evidence from multiple studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":48447,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Political Science","volume":"67 2","pages":"440-455"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"External Validity and Meta-Analysis\",\"authors\":\"Tara Slough,&nbsp;Scott A. Tyson\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/ajps.12742\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Meta-analysis is a method that combines estimates from studies conducted on different samples, in different contexts, or at different times. Social scientists increasingly use meta-analyses to aggregate evidence and learn about general substantive phenomena. We develop a framework to examine the theoretical foundations of meta-analysis, with emphasis on clarifying the role of external validity. We identify the conditions under which multiple studies are target-equivalent, meaning they identify the same empirical target. Our main result shows that external validity and harmonization, in comparisons made and how outcomes are measured, are necessary and sufficient for target-equivalence. We examine common formulations of meta-analysis—fixed- and random-effects models—developing the theoretical assumptions that underpin them and providing design-based identification results for these models. We then provide practical guidance based on our framework and results. Our results reveal limits to agnostic approaches to the combination of causal evidence from multiple studies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48447,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of Political Science\",\"volume\":\"67 2\",\"pages\":\"440-455\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"11\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal of Political Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ajps.12742\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Political Science","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ajps.12742","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

摘要

荟萃分析是一种综合对不同样本、不同背景或不同时间进行的研究的估计的方法。社会科学家越来越多地使用元分析来收集证据并了解一般的实质性现象。我们开发了一个框架来检查元分析的理论基础,重点是澄清外部有效性的作用。我们确定了多个研究目标相等的条件,这意味着它们确定了相同的经验目标。我们的主要结果表明,外部有效性和协调,在比较和如何衡量结果,是必要的和充分的目标对等。我们研究了元分析的常见公式——固定效应和随机效应模型——发展了支撑它们的理论假设,并为这些模型提供了基于设计的识别结果。然后,我们根据我们的框架和结果提供实用的指导。我们的研究结果揭示了从多个研究中结合因果证据的不可知论方法的局限性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
External Validity and Meta-Analysis

Meta-analysis is a method that combines estimates from studies conducted on different samples, in different contexts, or at different times. Social scientists increasingly use meta-analyses to aggregate evidence and learn about general substantive phenomena. We develop a framework to examine the theoretical foundations of meta-analysis, with emphasis on clarifying the role of external validity. We identify the conditions under which multiple studies are target-equivalent, meaning they identify the same empirical target. Our main result shows that external validity and harmonization, in comparisons made and how outcomes are measured, are necessary and sufficient for target-equivalence. We examine common formulations of meta-analysis—fixed- and random-effects models—developing the theoretical assumptions that underpin them and providing design-based identification results for these models. We then provide practical guidance based on our framework and results. Our results reveal limits to agnostic approaches to the combination of causal evidence from multiple studies.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.30
自引率
2.40%
发文量
61
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Political Science (AJPS) publishes research in all major areas of political science including American politics, public policy, international relations, comparative politics, political methodology, and political theory. Founded in 1956, the AJPS publishes articles that make outstanding contributions to scholarly knowledge about notable theoretical concerns, puzzles or controversies in any subfield of political science.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信