Publication bias is present in the embodied vocabulary learning literature, suggesting pooled effects may overestimate the true benefit¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r3 · q3
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Funnel plot asymmetry and significant Egger's tests indicate small-study effects, so pooled effect sizes may be inflated. → Xiaoxuan Li · Julia Chatain · Fan Wang · Manu Kapur 2026

Evidence¶

Xiaoxuan Li · Julia Chatain · Fan Wang · Manu Kapur 2026¶

Xiaoxuan Li · Julia Chatain · Fan Wang · Manu Kapur. (2026). From Body to Word: A Three-Level Meta-Analysis of Embodied Vocabulary Learning. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-026-10194-9

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r3

Multilevel Egger's regression tests on the meta-analytic corpus showed a significant association between standard error and effect size in both designs, indicating small-study effects. Leave-one-study-out analyses showed pooled effects were not driven by any single study.

"The results indicated a significant association between standard error and effect size for both between-subject studies ( B = 14.34, p < .001) and within-subject studies (B = 7.33, p < .001), suggesting the presence of small-study effects."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Publication-bias checks indicate the pooled effect is unlikely to result from publication bias — related
• The pooled effect of writing instruction for US ELL students is robust to sensitivity analyses but funnel plot asymmetry suggests possible missing positive effect sizes — related
• Publication bias is unlikely to explain the consistency of SRL intervention effect sizes — related
• Publication bias is evident for Negative Behaviour and Anxiety/Stress across all RCTs and for Mindfulness in active-control RCTs, suggesting overestimation of MBI effects — related
• Evidence of publication bias exists, but the pooled video effects are robust to it — related
• Egger's test suggests publication bias may be present, with the selection-model adjusted mean effect falling to 0.36 — related
• Publication-bias tests found no evidence of substantial publication bias in the meta-analytic sample — reports the opposite
• No publication bias is detected in the collected Covid-19 achievement estimates — related
• The pooled self-efficacy–partnership correlation appears robust to the file-drawer problem — reports the opposite
• Publication bias is indicated for the performance-approach and performance-avoidance anxiety effects but not for the depression effects — related
• Funnel-plot asymmetry indicates small-study effects for some emotion–learning models — related
• Publication bias was significant for the overall DT analysis but not for the fluency, flexibility, or originality indicator analyses — related
• Publication bias evidence is mixed: marginal asymmetry for tutees but no missing studies, and no bias for tutors — related
• Publication bias is minimal in the meta-analytic estimate of the inhibitory control–mathematical ability correlation — related
• No evidence of publication bias was found in the achievement goal–dishonesty literature — related
• Funnel-plot asymmetry suggests possible selection or publication bias, but p-curve analyses indicate evidential value for the pooled relationships — related
• Publication bias could not be ruled out in the pooled teacher-student SEC estimate, though the association persisted across sensitivity analyses — related