...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Perspectives on Psychological Science >Pay No Attention to That Data Behind the Curtain: On Angry Birds, Happy Children, Scholarly Squabbles, Publication Bias, and Why Betas Rule Metas
【24h】

Pay No Attention to That Data Behind the Curtain: On Angry Birds, Happy Children, Scholarly Squabbles, Publication Bias, and Why Betas Rule Metas

机译：无需关注幕后的数据：关于愤怒的小鸟，快乐的孩子，学术争吵，出版偏见以及Beta为何会影响元数据

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

This article responds to five comments on my Angry Birds meta-analysis of video game influences on children (Ferguson, 2015, this issue). Given ongoing debates on video game influences, comments varied from the supportive to the self-proclaimed angry, yet hopefully they and this response will contribute to constructive discussion as the field moves forward. In this reply, I address some misconceptions in the comments and present data that challenge the assumption that standardized regression coefficients are invariably unsuitable for meta-analysis or that bivariate correlations are invariably suitable for meta-analysis. The suitability of any data should be considered on a case-by-case basis, and data indicates that the coefficients included in the Angry Birds meta-analysis did not distort results. Study selection, effect size extraction, and interpretation improved upon problematic issues in other recent meta-analyses. Further evidence is also provided to support the contention that publication bias remains problematic in video game literature. Sources of acrimony among scholars are explored as are areas of agreement. Ultimately, debates will only be resolved through a commitment to newer, more rigorous methods and open science.
机译：本文回应了我对《愤怒的小鸟》进行的关于视频游戏对儿童影响的荟萃分析的五条评论（Ferguson，2015年，本期）。鉴于有关视频游戏影响力的辩论一直在进行，评论从支持到自吹自angry都各不相同，但希望它们以及这种回应将有助于推动该领域的建设性讨论。在此答复中，我解决了评论中的一些误解，并提出了一些数据，这些数据挑战了以下假设：标准化回归系数始终不适合进行荟萃分析，或者双变量相关性始终适合进行荟萃分析。应根据具体情况考虑任何数据的适用性，并且数据表明《愤怒的小鸟》荟萃分析中包含的系数并未扭曲结果。研究选择，效果大小提取和解释在其他最近的荟萃分析中针对有问题的问题得到了改善。还提供了进一步的证据来支持在电子游戏文献中出版偏见仍然存在问题的论点。学者之间的争吵根源也得到了探讨。最终，只有通过致力于更新，更严格的方法和开放科学，才能解决辩论。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号