The meta-analytic effect of learning stations is resistant to publication bias¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2019 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Fail-Safe N analyses (Rosenthal N=613; Orwin N=119 zero-effect studies needed) indicate the overall effect is highly resistant to publication bias. → Mevlut AYDOGMUS & Cihad SENTURK 2019

Evidence¶

Mevlut AYDOGMUS & Cihad SENTURK 2019¶

Mevlut AYDOGMUS & Cihad SENTURK. (2019). THE EFFECTS OF LEARNING STATIONS TECHNIQUE ON ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT: A META-ANALYTIC STUDY. Research in Pedagogy, Vol.9, No.1. https://doi.org/10.17810/2015.87

q2 · i? · quant-synthesis · r2

Publication-bias assessment using the Funnel Scatter Graph, Crop and Fill, and Fail Safe N methods. The funnel graph showed "a relatively symmetrical distribution", and Crop and Fill adjusted the effect only to 0.852 or 0.752.

"In this study, Rosenthal's Fail-Safe N value was calculated as 613. According to Orwin's Fail Safe N Method, 119 new studies with a zero effect are required to reduce the computed overall effect size to a value of 0.1"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Fail-safe N analyses (Rosenthal N = 902.2; Orwin N = 140.0) indicate the meta-analytic result is robust to unpublished conflicting studies — related
• Fail-safe analyses indicate the meta-analysis findings are not attributable to publication bias — related
• The pooled effect of multiple intelligence practices is resistant to publication bias — related
• Publication bias tests give mixed evidence: Egger's test indicates bias, but fail-safe N calculations lead the authors to conclude no publication bias — related
• The digital story meta-analysis is resistant to publication bias by fail-safe N and trim-and-fill tests — related
• Publication bias checks (funnel plot and Orwin's Fail-Safe N = 3182) found no evidence of bias in the meta-analysis — related
• The meta-analytic result is robust to publication bias, with a fail-safe number of 33,896.6 null studies needed to nullify the observed effect — related
• The meta-analysis is resistant to publication bias by Rosenthal's fail-safe N criterion — related
• Fail-safe N analyses indicate the pooled effect is resistant to publication bias (Rosenthal FSN = 2139; Orwin FSN = 1048) — related
• The meta-analysis results are resistant to publication bias, per fail-safe N of 1791 — related