This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Graham, S. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Narrative Versus Meta-Analytic Reviews of Race Differences in Motivation: A Comment on Cooper and Dorr

University of California, Los Angeles

Some of the benefits and shortcomings of a meta-analytic approach to reviewing race differences in need for achievement (Cooper & Dorr, 1995) are examined and compared to the narrative approach that I adopted in a previous review on this topic (Graham, 1994). Among the benefits of meta-analysis are the calculation of effect sizes for race differences (compared to the box score method of my narrative review) and the presentation of replicable and objective procedures for organizing, describing, and comparing study characteristics. Among the perceived limitations are the meta-analyst’s reluctance to distinguish between low- and high-quality studies and an overemphasis on quantitative comparisons of substantively disparate literatures. The implications for studying race as a psychological variable are also discussed.

Review of Educational Research, Vol. 65, No. 4, 509-514 (1995)
DOI: 10.3102/00346543065004509


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				H. Cooper and N. Dorr Narrative Versus Meta-Analytic Reviews: A Rejoinder to Graham's Comment Review of Educational Research, January 1, 1995; 65(4): 515 - 517. [Abstract] [PDF]