Hello. Thank you so much for the video! I think I'm having trouble understanding how to code the information from the experiments. Could you please help me? Let's say I'm coding experiments from educational programs, and I want to know which instructional methods were most used. Do I create two different columns in case there is more than one instructional method? But if there are two columns, when I analyze the data, won't the information be a bit messed up? I'm a bit lost. Thank you for your time and for providing such good videos.
So this will largely depend on what you're trying to analyze, but I'll give an example that will hopefully clarify (and if not please let me know!). Let's saying i'm running a meta-analysis examining the impact of virtual characters (VC) compared to non-VC learning conditions. If the study i'm analyzing is VC vs traditional teaching, i'd have that comparison written down somewhere in the row as my comparison. I would also have a column that is my 'control condition' column where i would have 'traditional teaching' as a categorical option in a drop down menu. Then i would also have additional columns that focus on aspects of the VC design, such as if it were animated, what gender it was, what kind of voice it used, etc. Then when i run my meta-analysis, i have categorical columns (control condition, animation, gender, voice in this example) I can examine as moderators. You can of course have additional columns to describe the control condition in more detail. It really depends on what you're trying to analyze, as you can, within certain constraints for meta-analysis to make sure you don't violate statistical assumptions, set up your coding form with a huge variety of different columns etc. Basically what I'm saying is, you can have whatever columns you want to describe your studies, as long as that is what you're interested in and you don't violate statistical assumptions. I hope this makes sense, if not please let me know!
@LearnMetaAnalysis Thank you for your reply! I will try to explain my problem. If I'm coding for an intervention in a school, and I want to code for instructional methods... let's say an experiment uses both meditation and discussion as a method. Should I code both methods in different columns, and then perform a meta regression later (instructional methods as the IV and effect sizes as the DV) on to see which methods had the most effect? ^^ Thank you so much for the reply. I think I'm struggling because it is not a case of this method versus that method, but combined methods
@@FC-os1mm Ah I think I understand the issue now. What I would likely do in this case is first code everything via just writing down the specific interventions so I can see what the 'combinations' of methods are. Then if there are enough similarities, you could create categories (e.g., meditation + discussion could be one category, lecture only could be one category, lecture + meditation could be a category, etc.). But I would probably take the approach of fine-grained, specific coding first, then reviewing what potential commonalities I had, then re-coding a new variable with the new categories. Example: let's say i have studies that have lecture (k=8), meditation + discussion(k=1), discussion (k=4), group work (k=12), group work + discussion (k=2). Then, I would likely (depending on my research questions) create the following groups: lecture only (k=8), discussion only (k=4), group work only (k=12), multiple interventions (k=3). Downside of this approach is that 'multiple interventions' group in this case is a mix of misc. interventions, so you would need to keep that in mind during interpretation; it would not be particularly meaningful in this case. But you may ultimately decide you want to keep them coded as fine-grained as they were initially, in which case you don't need to do any re-coding. It's all going to depend on your research question(s) and the data available. I apologize this seems like kind of a vague answer but 1) i don't want to tell you how to do your study because it's your study, 2) there are many ways this could be done, it really depends on what makes the most sense for what you need to know.
Hello. Thank you so much for the video! I think I'm having trouble understanding how to code the information from the experiments. Could you please help me? Let's say I'm coding experiments from educational programs, and I want to know which instructional methods were most used. Do I create two different columns in case there is more than one instructional method? But if there are two columns, when I analyze the data, won't the information be a bit messed up? I'm a bit lost. Thank you for your time and for providing such good videos.
So this will largely depend on what you're trying to analyze, but I'll give an example that will hopefully clarify (and if not please let me know!). Let's saying i'm running a meta-analysis examining the impact of virtual characters (VC) compared to non-VC learning conditions. If the study i'm analyzing is VC vs traditional teaching, i'd have that comparison written down somewhere in the row as my comparison. I would also have a column that is my 'control condition' column where i would have 'traditional teaching' as a categorical option in a drop down menu. Then i would also have additional columns that focus on aspects of the VC design, such as if it were animated, what gender it was, what kind of voice it used, etc. Then when i run my meta-analysis, i have categorical columns (control condition, animation, gender, voice in this example) I can examine as moderators. You can of course have additional columns to describe the control condition in more detail.
It really depends on what you're trying to analyze, as you can, within certain constraints for meta-analysis to make sure you don't violate statistical assumptions, set up your coding form with a huge variety of different columns etc. Basically what I'm saying is, you can have whatever columns you want to describe your studies, as long as that is what you're interested in and you don't violate statistical assumptions. I hope this makes sense, if not please let me know!
@LearnMetaAnalysis Thank you for your reply! I will try to explain my problem. If I'm coding for an intervention in a school, and I want to code for instructional methods... let's say an experiment uses both meditation and discussion as a method. Should I code both methods in different columns, and then perform a meta regression later (instructional methods as the IV and effect sizes as the DV) on to see which methods had the most effect? ^^ Thank you so much for the reply. I think I'm struggling because it is not a case of this method versus that method, but combined methods
@@FC-os1mm Ah I think I understand the issue now. What I would likely do in this case is first code everything via just writing down the specific interventions so I can see what the 'combinations' of methods are. Then if there are enough similarities, you could create categories (e.g., meditation + discussion could be one category, lecture only could be one category, lecture + meditation could be a category, etc.). But I would probably take the approach of fine-grained, specific coding first, then reviewing what potential commonalities I had, then re-coding a new variable with the new categories.
Example: let's say i have studies that have lecture (k=8), meditation + discussion(k=1), discussion (k=4), group work (k=12), group work + discussion (k=2). Then, I would likely (depending on my research questions) create the following groups: lecture only (k=8), discussion only (k=4), group work only (k=12), multiple interventions (k=3). Downside of this approach is that 'multiple interventions' group in this case is a mix of misc. interventions, so you would need to keep that in mind during interpretation; it would not be particularly meaningful in this case. But you may ultimately decide you want to keep them coded as fine-grained as they were initially, in which case you don't need to do any re-coding. It's all going to depend on your research question(s) and the data available.
I apologize this seems like kind of a vague answer but 1) i don't want to tell you how to do your study because it's your study, 2) there are many ways this could be done, it really depends on what makes the most sense for what you need to know.
@@LearnMetaAnalysis No, don't worry! You have helped me so much! Thank you very much for your time and your explanation.