Bootstrap confidence intervals for the mean correlation corrected for case iv range restriction: A more adequate procedure for meta-analysis

Journal of Applied Psychology

Volumn 98, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 183-193

  Li, Johnson Ching Hong ^a   Cui, Ying ^b   Chan, Wai ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

^c CHINESE UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

Author keywords

Bootstrap; Case IV range restriction; Confidence intervals; Correlation; Meta analysis; Procedure

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; HUMAN; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); METHODOLOGY; MONTE CARLO METHOD; REPRODUCIBILITY; STATISTICAL BIAS; STATISTICAL MODEL; STATISTICS;

BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); CONFIDENCE INTERVALS; HUMANS; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; MODELS, STATISTICAL; MONTE CARLO METHOD; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 84880975115     PISSN: 00219010     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0029946     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Adams, D. C., Gurevitch, J., & Rosenberg, S. (1997). Resampling tests for meta-analysis of ecological data. Ecology, 78, 1277-1283. doi:10.1890/ 0012-9658(1997)078[1277:R TFMAO]2.0.CO;2
2. Banks, G. C., Batchelor, J. H., & McDaniel, M. A. (2010). Smarter people are (a bit) more symmetrical: A meta-analysis of the relationship between intelligence and fluctuating asymmetry. Intelligence, 38, 393- 401. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2010.04.003
3. Beasley, W. H., & Rodgers, J. L. (2009). Resampling methods. In R. E. Millsap & A. Maydeau-Olivares (Eds.), The Sage handbook of quantitative methods in psychology (pp. 362-386). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
4. Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2009). Introduction to meta-analysis. Chichester, UK: Wiley. doi:10.1002/ 9780470743386
5. Brannick, M. T., Yang, L., & Cafri, G. (2008). Comparison of weights in meta-analysis under realistic conditions. Poster presented at the 23rd annual conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, San Francisco, CA.
6. Cass M.H., Siu, O. L., Faragher, E. B., & Cooper, C. L. (2003). A meta-analysis of the relationship between job satisfaction and employee health in Hong Kong. Stress and Health, 19, 79-95. doi:10.1002/smi .959
7. Chan, W., & Chan, D. W.-L. (2004). Bootstrap standard error and confidence intervals for the correlation corrected for range restriction: A simulation study. Psychological Methods, 9, 369-385. doi:10.1037/ 1082-989X.9.3.369
8. Cheung, M. W. L. (2008). A model for integrating fixed-, random-, and mixed-effects meta-analyses into structural equation modeling. Psychological Methods, 13, 182-202. doi:10.1037/a0013163
9. Christian, M. S., Bradley, J. C., Wallace, J. C., & Burke, M. J. (2009). Workplace safety: A meta-analysis of the roles of person and situation factors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 1103-1127. doi:10.1037/ a0016172
10. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
11. Crook T. R., Todd, S. Y., Combs, J. G., Woehr, D. J., & Ketchen, D. (2011). Does human capital matter? A meta-analysis of the relationship between human capital and firm performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96, 443-456. doi:10.1037/a0022147
12. Efron, B., & Tibshirani, R. J. (1993). An introduction to the bootstrap. New York, NY: Chapman & Hall.
13. Field A. P. (2005). Is the meta-analysis of correlations accurate when population correlations vary? Psychological Methods10, 444-467. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.10.4.444
14. Hafdahl, A. R. (2009). Improved Fisher z estimators for univariate randomeffects meta-analysis of correlations. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 62, 233-261. doi:10.1348/000711008X281633
15. Hafdahl A. R., & Williams, M. A. (2009). Meta-analysis of correlations revisited: Attempted replication and extension of Field's (2001) simulation studies. Psychological Methods, 14, 24 - 42. doi:10.1037/ a0014697
16. Hedges, L. V. (1992). Meta-analysis. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 17, 279-296. doi:10.3102/10769986017004279
17. Hunter J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (2004). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
18. Hunter, J. E., Schmidt, F. L., & Le, H. (2006). Implications of direct and indirect range restriction for meta-analysis methods and findings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 594-612. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.91.3 .594
19. Le, H., & Schmidt, F. L. (2006). Correcting indirect range restriction in meta-analysis: Testing a new analytic procedure. Psychological Methods, 11, 416-438. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.11.4.416
20. Li, J. C.-H., Chan, W., & Cui, Y. (2011). Bootstrap standard error and confidence intervals for the correlations corrected for indirect range restriction. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 64, 367-387. doi:10.1348/2044-8317.002007
21. McDaniel, M. A., Whetzel, D. L., Schmidt, F. L., & Maurer, S. D. (1994). The validity of employment interviews: A comprehensive review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 599 - 616. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.79.4.599
22. Mooney, C. Z. (1997). Monte Carlo simulation [Sage University Paper series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences, Series No. 07-116]. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
23. Schmidt, F. L., Oh, I.-S., & Hayes, T. L. (2009). Fixed- versus random-effects models in meta-analysis: Model properties and an empirical comparison of differences in results. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 62, 97-128. doi:10.1348/000711007X255327
24. Schmidt, F. L., Oh, I.-S., & Le, H. (2006). Increasing the accuracy of corrections for range restriction: Implications for selection procedure validities and other research results. Personnel Psychology, 59, 281- 305. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2006.00037.x
25. Skrondal, A. (2000). Design and analysis of Monte Carlo experiments: Attacking the conventional wisdom. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 35, 137-167. doi:10.1207/S15327906MBR3502_1 Thorndike, R. L. (1949). Personnel selection. New York, NY: Wiley.
26. Wilson, E. B. (1927). Probable inference, the law of succession, and statistical inference. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 22, 209-212. doi:10.1080/01621459.1927.10502953 Wolfram Research. (2008). Mathematica edition: Version 7.0. IL: Author.
27. Ziegler, M., Dietl, E., Danay, E., Vogel, M., & Bühner, S. (2011). Predicting training success with general mental ability, specific ability tests, and (un)structured interviews: A meta-analysis with unique samples. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 19, 170-182. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2389.2011.00544.x