Techniques of Research Synthesis

Abstract

In this introduction to the application of meta-analysis as a quantitative synthesis technique, several alternative approaches to research synthesis are described. Their advantages and disadvantages, as compared to those of the technique of meta-analysis, are discussed. Decisions that must be faced by the prospective user of meta-analysis are described, as are the tasks normally undertaken in such a synthesis. Different kinds of problems are posed by different applications of meta-analysis, and trade-offs inevitably result from selection among the available solutions. The costs and benefits of making the more typical of these choices are detailed.

A grounded theory for research synthesis of selected distance education literature

“…Although they might possess theoretical and methodological variations and take different forms and research approaches, they share the prominent characteristic of synthesizing primary research studies. Examples of the terminology include literature review; research review (Light & Pillemer, 1982); research integration (Carlberg & Walberg, 1984); integrative review (Jackson, 1980); metaanalysis (Glass, 1976); metasynthesis (Sandelowski, Docherty, & Emden, 1997); metaresearch (Rogers, 1985), systematic review (Cook, Sackett, & Spitzer, 1995); and qualitative meta-analysis (Schreiber, Crooks, & Stern, 1997).…”

A Teacher's Guide to Meta-Analysis

“…Also, meta-analysis conducted using the same primary studies can, at times, yield different results (Mostert, 2001). Finally, due to errors in reporting, primary studies' effect sizes can be extremely large and misleading (Carlberg & Walberg, 1984). It is, therefore, important that practitioners evaluate meta-analyses critically and use information gleaned from them as only one source, among many, to guide their instruction.…”

“…For example, a study that is conducted using simple pre-and posttest without control group may have an inflated effect size. On the other hand, a study conducted using standardized norm-referenced tests may show smaller effect size (Carlberg & Walberg, 1984; for a detailed explanation of effect sizes, see Kavale & Glass, 1981).…”

View Entire Issue

“…For example, in a synthesis of mastery learning studies one might consider features such as: a) how far back in time the review will go; b) the grade level of subjects; c) the subject matter tested; d) the duration of treatment; e) whether self-paced or group-based treatments is used; e) the type and quality of the dependent variable; and f) a host of experimental design characteristics (e.g., internal and external validity). Carlberg and Walberg (1984) point out trade-offs in: a) narrowly focusing the synthesis to exclude relevant variations in treatments (high fidelity/limited conclusions); and b) making the scope of inclusion so broad that marginally relevant and/or bad research is analyzed (low fidelity/more robust conclusions).…”