Abstract
An empirical study and comparison is made of the functioning of the effect size proposed from the traditional meta-analytical points of view and the hierarchical linear models. These estimators are compared in bias, efficiency and robustness, via a Monte Carlo simulation. The results show the best behaviour of Empirical Bayes estimator (EB). This estimator shows a slightly biased behaviour compared with the traditional, although it is obviously more efficient and robust than the alternative traditionally used. Thus, it is empirically proved that the hierarchical linear models are an alternative to the traditional methods of meta-analytical synthesis.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bryk, A. S. and Raundenbush, S. W. (1992). Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods. London: Sage.
Bryk, A., Raudenbush, S. W. & Cogdon, R. (1996). Hierarchical Linear and Non-Linear Modelling with the HLM/2L and HLM/3L Programs. Chicago: SSI International.
Efron, B. & Morris, C. (1975). Data analysis using Stein's estimator and its generalisations. Journal of the American Statistical Association 74: 311–319.
Glass, G. V. (1976). Primary, secondary and meta-analysis of research. Educational Researcher 5(10): 3–8.
Glass, G., McGaw, B. & Smith, M. L. (1981). Meta-Analysis in Social Research. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Hedges, L. V. (1981). Distribution theory for Glass' estimator of effect size and related estimators. Journal of Educational Statistics 6(2): 197–228.
Hedges, L. V. (1982a). Estimation of effect size from a series of independent experiments. Psychological Bulletin 92: 490–499.
Hedges, L. V. (1982b). Fitting categorical models to effect sizes from a series of experiments. Journal of Educational Statistics 7: 490–499.
Hedges, L. V. (1983a). A random effects model for effect size. Psychological Bulletin 93: 388–395.
Hedges, L. V. (1983b). Combining independent estimators in research synthesis. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology 36: 123–131.
Hedges, L. V. & Olkin, I. (1985). Statistical Methods for Meta-Analysis. Orlando: Academic Press.
Hunter, J. E. & Schmidt, F. L. (1990). Meta-analysis. In: R. Hambleton & J. N. Zoal (eds), Advances in Educational and Psychological Testing. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
James, W. & Stein, C. (1961). Estimation with quadratic loss. Fourth Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability (Vol. 1). Berkeley: University of California.
Louis, T. A. (1991). Using empirical Bayesian methods in bio-pharmaceutical research. Statistics in Medicine 10: 811–829.
Louis, T. A. & Zelterman, D. (1994). Bayesian approaches to research synthesis. In: H. Cooper and L. V. Hedges (eds), The Handbook of Research Synthesis. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, pp. 411–422.
Raudenbush, S. & Bryk, A. (1985). Empirical bayesian meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Statistics 10(2): 75–98.
Rubin, D. B. (1981). Estimation in parallel randomised experiments. Journal of Educational Statistics 6(4): 377–400.
Stone, C. A. (1993). The use of multiple replications in IRT based Monte Carlo research. Paper presented at the European Meeting of the Psychometric Society, Barcelona.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Castro, M., Gaviria, Jl. Application of Hierarchical Linear Models to Meta-Analysis: Study of the Monte Carlo Simulation on the Functioning of Traditional and Empirical-Bayes Effect Size. Quality & Quantity 34, 33–50 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1004799525371
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1004799525371