Abstract
Meta-analysis refers to the statistical methods used in research synthesis for combining and integrating results from individual studies. The present study draws on the strengths of bibliometric methods in order to offer an overview of meta-analytic research activity in psychology, as well as to characterize its most important aspects and their evolution over time. A total of 2,874 articles published in scientific journals were identified and standard bibliometric indicators (e.g., number of articles, productivity by country, and national and international collaborations) and laws (e.g., Price’s and Lotka’s law) were applied to these data. The results suggest a clear upward trend not only in the number of articles published since the 1970s (with a peak of productivity in 2010), but also in both the number of authors by article (\( \bar{x} = 2. 7 5 \), SD = 1.53) and internationalization, especially since the 1990s. The interest in meta-analysis extends to many authors (n = 5,445), countries (n = 44) and scientific journals (n = 394), as well as to several areas of psychology that mostly fit a growing exponential model. In future studies it would be interesting to explore the citing behaviour and patterns in the meta-analysis literature.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
The number of zones was established by choosing the value that minimizes differences between the Bradford multiplier k and each estimated value of k, and between the different estimated values of k.
References
Abt, H. A. (2011). A publication index that is independent of age. Scientometrics. doi:10.1007/s11192-011-0525-4.
Amin, M., & Mabe, M. (2000). Impact factors: Use and abuse. Perspectives in Publishing, 1, 1–6.
Bailar, J. C. (1997). The promise and problems of meta-analysis. New England Journal of Medicine, 337, 559–561.
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2009). Introduction to meta-analysis. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Bradford, S. C. (1934). Sources of information on specific subjects. Engineering, 23(3), 85–88.
Bradford, S. C. (1948). Documentation. London: Crosby Lockwood Sons, Ltd.
Caird, J. K., Willness, C. R., Steel, P., & Scialfa, C. (2008). A meta-analysis of the effects of cell phones on driver performance. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 40(4), 1282–1293.
Cooper, H. M. (1984). The integrative research review: A systematic approach. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Cooper, H. (1998). Integrating research: A guide for literature reviews (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Ltd.
Cooper, H., & Hedges, L. V. (1994). The handbook of research synthesis. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Dong, P., Loh, M., & Mondry, A. (2005). The “impact factor” revisited. Biomedical Digital Libraries, 2, 7.
Egghe, L. (1986). The dual of Bradford’s law. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 37(4), 246–255.
Egghe, L. (1990). Applications of the theory of Bradford’s law to the calculation of Leimkuhler’s law and to the completion of bibliographies. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 41(7), 469–492.
Feinstein, A. R. (1995). Meta-analysis: statistical alchemy for the 21st century. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 48, 71–79.
Glass, G. V. (1976). Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis of research. Educational Researcher, 5, 3–8.
Glass, G. V., McGaw, B., & Smith, M. L. (1981). Meta-analysis in social research. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications, Ltd.
Glass, G. V., & Smith, M. L. (1979). Meta-analysis of research on the relationship between class size and achievement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 1, 2–16.
Hartung, J., Knapp, G., & Sinha, B. K. (2008). Statistical meta-analysis with applications. Hoboken: Wiley.
Hedges, L. V., & Olkin, I. (1985). Statistical methods for meta-analysis. Orlando: Academic Press.
Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (1990). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (2004). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Ltd.
Hunter, J. E., Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, R. (1979). Differential validity of employment tests by race: A comprehensive review and analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 721–735.
Kuncel, N. R., Hezlett, S. A., & Ones, D. S. (2004). Academic performance, career potential, creativity, and job performance: Can one construct predict them all? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(1), 148–161.
Leimkuhler, F. F. (1967). The Bradford distribution. Journal of Documentation, 23(3), 197–207.
Leucht, S., Komossa, K., Rummel-Kluge, C., Corves, C., Hunger, H., Schmid, F., et al. (2009). A meta-analysis of head-to-head comparisons of second-generation antipsychotics in the treatment of schizophrenia. American Journal of Psychiatry, 166(2), 152–163.
Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (1996). Practical meta-analysis. Nashville: Center for Evaluation, HSRI.
Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (2001). Practical meta-analysis. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc.
Moed, H. F., & Van Leeuwen, T. N. (1995). Improving the accuracy of Institute for scientific information’s journal impact factor. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 46(6), 461–467.
Pao, M. L. (1985). Lotka law—A testing procedure. Information Processing and Management, 21(4), 305–320.
Price, D. J. de Solla (1963). Little science, big science. New York: Columbia University Press.
Renehan, A. G., Tyson, M., Egger, M., Heller, R. F., & Zwahlen, M. (2008). Body-mass index and incidence of cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective observational studies. Lancet, 371(9612), 569–578.
Rosenthal, R. (1984). Meta-analytic procedures for social research. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Rosenthal, R. (1991). Meta-analytic procedures for social research. London: Sage Publications, Inc.
Rosenthal, R., & Rubin, D. (1978). Interpersonal expectancy effects: The first 345 studies. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3, 377–415.
Rothstein, H. R., Sutton, A. J., & Borenstein, M. (2005). Publication bias in meta-analysis: Prevention, assessment, and adjustments. Chichester: Wiley.
Schmidt, F. (2008). Meta-analysis: A constantly evolving research integration tool. Organizational Research Methods, 11(1), 96–113.
Shapiro, S. (1994). Meta-analysis/Shmeta-analysis. American Journal of Epidemiology, 140(9), 771–778.
Sharpe, D. (1997). Of apples and oranges, file drawers and garbage: Why validity issues in meta-analysis will not go away. Clinical Psychology Review, 17, 881–901.
Smith, M. L., & Glass, G. V. (1977). Meta-analysis of psychotherapy outcome studies. American Psychologist, 32, 752–760.
Viswesvaran, C., & Ones, D. S. (2000). Measurement error in “big five factors” personality assessment: Reliability generalization across studies and measures. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60(2), 224–235.
Acknowledgments
This study was supported by grant 2009SGR00822 from the Departament d’Universitats, Recerca i Societat de la Informació of the Generalitat de Catalunya.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Guilera, G., Barrios, M. & Gómez-Benito, J. Meta-analysis in psychology: a bibliometric study. Scientometrics 94, 943–954 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0761-2
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0761-2