Publication bias is unlikely to explain the consistency of SRL intervention effect sizes¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2024 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Egger's regression intercept test (intercept = 0.691) suggested publication bias is unlikely to account for the observed consistency in effect sizes. → Guntur 2024

Evidence¶

Guntur 2024¶

Guntur, M., & Purnomo, Y. W. (2024). A Meta-Analysis of Self-Regulated Learning Interventions Studies on Learning Outcomes in Online and Blended Environments. Online Learning Journal, 28(3). https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v28i3.4025

q2 · i? · quant-synthesis · r1

Publication-bias assessment of the 15 included studies using a funnel plot and Egger's Regression Intercept test, analyzed in JASP. The authors report the funnel plot alone was inconclusive, so the Egger test was used; the resulting data "does not show bias".

"Egger's regression intercept test yielded a value of 0.691 for the intercept. These findings suggest that publication bias is unlikely to account for the observed consistency in impact size across studies."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Self-regulated learning improves achievement — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it
• Funnel plot and Egger's test indicate publication bias in the PBL tutor-background data, and trim-and-fill suggests the overall effect is overestimated — related
• Self-regulated learning interventions have a moderate effect (0.65) on learning outcomes in online and blended environments — related
• Publication-bias checks indicate the pooled effect is unlikely to result from publication bias — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
• Self Regulated Learning Predicts Achievement — related
• Trim-and-fill analysis shows no publication bias in the meta-analysis of innovative learning effects on mathematical problem-solving ability — related
• Publication-bias diagnostics suggest minimal influence on the meta-analytic findings, with a borderline Begg's test — related
• Publication-bias assessments substantially reduce the intercept prediction, often indicating no positive transfer when the identified moderators are absent — related
• Funnel-plot and fail-safe N analyses indicate small publication bias, and one-study-removal analysis indicates stable pooled effects — related
• Funnel-plot asymmetry was significant in both meta-analyses, indicating possible publication or selection bias — related
• SRL interventions are effective in improving both SRL activity and achievement in higher education — related
• Funnel plot and trim-and-fill analyses do not indicate publication bias in the meta-analytic effects of CSCL scripts — related
• A cluster-robust Egger-type test found no statistically detectable small-study effects, interpreted as absence of evidence rather than evidence of no publication bias — related
• The meta-analysis finds no major publication bias in the teacher personality–outcome associations — related
• No evidence of publication bias was found in the meta-analysis — related
• Publication bias is present in the mathematics–writing literature, though the pooled estimate is robust in sensitivity analyses — related
• Funnel-plot asymmetry ran contrary to small-study effects because larger-sample studies reported larger effect sizes, likely reflecting longer training programs — related
• Publication bias is present in the embodied vocabulary learning literature, suggesting pooled effects may overestimate the true benefit — 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
• The text generation research field shows a small-study effect suggesting publication bias — reports the opposite
• Most study, measurement, and intervention moderators did not explain significant variance in SRL intervention effect sizes — related
• Regulation-of-learning interventions in programming education show an average effect of 0.59 on programming learning — related
• No clear evidence of publication bias or small study effects in the collaborative instruction literature — related
• Publication-bias tests found no evidence of substantial publication bias in the meta-analytic sample — related
• 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 — related
• Publication bias is indicated for the performance-approach and performance-avoidance anxiety effects but not for the depression effects — related
• Publication-bias tests (Egger's test and trim-and-fill) indicate absence of publication bias for the overall effect and moderators — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
• 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
• No evidence of dissemination bias was detected in the meta-analysis — related
• Publication-bias checks indicate limited risk of publication bias in the extensive reading literature synthesized — 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
• No evidence of publication bias was detected in the pooled L2 gender-difference literature — related
• Formal tests find no substantial evidence of publication bias or small-study effects in the meta-analysis — related