Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

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

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
The Journal of Special Education
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
Right arrow Citation Map
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
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Eysenck, H.J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Eysenck, H.J.
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?

Meta-Analysis: an Abuse of Research Integration

H.J. Eysenck, Ph.D., D.Sc.

University of London

The paper reviews many objections to meta-analysis, both in principle, and in particular, as practiced by its originators. Particular attention is given to the most widely cited application of meta-analysis: to the facts of psychotherapy. It is suggested that the claims to inclusiveness and objectivity, made for these analyses, are not supported by the evidence, and that the conclusions drawn from the evidence surveyed are incompatible with the results of the analysis on which they are supposed to be based. It is further suggested that no pseudo-objective computerized technique can substitute for the scientific insight and theoretical acumen of the investigator. Indeed, for most purposes the simplistic scoring systems of meta-analysis are not only useless, but may be counterproductive. It is precisely in those areas where there is most disagreement that these methods are least applicable.

The Journal of Special Education, Vol. 18, No. 1, 41-59 (1984)
DOI: 10.1177/002246698401800106
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
 Eval Health ProfHome page
R. W. Preiss and M. Allen
Understanding and using Meta-Analysis
Eval Health Prof, September 1, 1995; 18(3): 315 - 335.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 REVIEW OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCHHome page
S. Graham
Narrative Versus Meta-Analytic Reviews of Race Differences in Motivation: A Comment on Cooper and Dorr
Review of Educational Research, January 1, 1995; 65(4): 509 - 514.
[Abstract] [PDF]