Abstract
Meta-analyses summarize a field’s research base and are therefore highly influential. Despite their value, the standards for an excellent meta-analysis, one that is potentially award-winning, have changed in the last decade. Each step of a meta-analysis is now more formalized, from the identification of relevant articles to coding, moderator analysis, and reporting of results. What was exemplary a decade ago can be somewhat dated today. Using the award-winning meta-analysis by Stahl et al. (Unraveling the effects of cultural diversity in teams: A meta-analysis of research on multicultural work groups. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(4):690–709, 2010) as an exemplar, we adopted a multi-disciplinary approach (e.g., management, psychology, health sciences) to summarize the anatomy (i.e., fundamental components) of a modern meta-analysis, focusing on: (1) data collection (i.e., literature search and screening, coding), (2) data preparation (i.e., treatment of multiple effect sizes, outlier identification and management, publication bias), (3) data analysis (i.e., average effect sizes, heterogeneity of effect sizes, moderator search), and (4) reporting (i.e., transparency and reproducibility, future research directions). In addition, we provide guidelines and a decision-making tree for when even foundational and highly cited meta-analyses should be updated. Based on the latest evidence, we summarize what journal editors and reviewers should expect, authors should provide, and readers (i.e., other researchers, practitioners, and policymakers) should consider about meta-analytic reviews.
Highlights
Scientific knowledge is the result of a multi-generational collaboration where we cumulatively generate and connect findings gleaned from individual studies (Beugelsdijk, van Witteloostuijn, The anatomy of an award-winning meta-analysis & Meyer, 2020)
Meta-analysis is critical to this process, being the methodology of choice to quantitatively synthesize existing empirical evidence and draw evidence-based recommendations for practice and policymaking (Aguinis, Pierce, Bosco, Dalton, & Dalton, 2011; Davies, Nutley, & Smith, 1999)
MODERN METHODOLOGY Using Stahl et al as an exemplar, we summarize the anatomy of a modern meta-analysis, focusing on: (1) data collection, (2) data preparation, (3) data analysis, and (4) reporting
Summary
Scientific knowledge is the result of a multi-generational collaboration where we cumulatively generate and connect findings gleaned from individual studies (Beugelsdijk, van Witteloostuijn, The anatomy of an award-winning meta-analysis& Meyer, 2020). Scientific knowledge is the result of a multi-generational collaboration where we cumulatively generate and connect findings gleaned from individual studies Meta-analysis is critical to this process, being the methodology of choice to quantitatively synthesize existing empirical evidence and draw evidence-based recommendations for practice and policymaking (Aguinis, Pierce, Bosco, Dalton, & Dalton, 2011; Davies, Nutley, & Smith, 1999). Aguinis, Pierce, et al (2011) reported a staggering increase from 55 business and management-related articles using meta-analysis for the 1970–1985 period to 6918 articles for the 1994–2009 period. To illustrate the evolution of meta-analysis, we use the award-winning contribution by Stahl, Maznevski, Voigt and Jonsen (2010) who effectively summarized and made sense of the voluminous correlational literature on team diversity and cultural differences
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
