Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Register here to gain access to SAGE's 500+ Journals Online

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Miller, N.
Right arrow Articles by Carlson, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Miller, N.
Right arrow Articles by Carlson, M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 17, No. 3, 335-343 (1991)
DOI: 10.1177/0146167291173014

The Validity of Inferential Judgments when Used in Theory-Testing Meta-Analysis

Norman Miller

University of Southern California

Ju Young Lee

University of Southern California

Michael Carlson

University of Southern California

This article examines the use of inferential judgments in meta-analysis as a means of testing hypotheses in social psychological theory. The authors discuss difficulties that meta-analysts usually face when they try to investigate the effects of psychological mediators in a substantive research area and suggest the use of inferential judgments to overcome them. A validity study is presented that supports this recommendation. It shows that judgments regarding the level of psychological mediators, as inferred from a reading of method sections of social psychological experiments, correlate highly with manipulation-check effect sizes. This was true for each of two affective mediators (positive and negative mood) and each of two cognitive mediators (perception of control and source credibility). However, as was predicted from thle literature on the role playing of social psychological experiments, judgments about subjects' helping behavior or attitude change, though highly reliable, were not so consistently related to dependent-measure effect sizes.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Pers Soc Psychol RevHome page
C. H. Utman
Performance Effects of Motivational State: A Meta-Analysis
Personality and Social Psychology Review, May 1, 1997; 1(2): 170 - 182.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Eval Health ProfHome page
N. Miller and V. E. Pollock
Use of Meta-Analysis for Testing Theory
Eval Health Prof, December 1, 1995; 18(4): 370 - 392.
[Abstract] [PDF]