Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorPasikowski, Sławomir
dc.date.accessioned2025-07-08T14:21:20Z
dc.date.available2025-07-08T14:21:20Z
dc.date.issued2025-07-03
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11089/55884
dc.description.abstractThis article explores the role of meta-analysis and systematic review in developing and refining empirical theories in educational sciences. It highlights the method’s value in synthesizing research findings, identifying patterns, and improving the explanatory power and coherence of theories. It also underscores the skepticism present in academic circles, especially concerning meta-analysis. While meta-analysis is widely used in evidence-based approaches, its adoption in educational research sometimes remains locally limited due to concerns about data quality, methodological heterogeneity, publication bias, and perceived epistemic incompatibility with constructivist or interpretive paradigms. The author argues that these challenges can be addressed through methodological rigor, data transparency, proper contextualization, and interdisciplinary training in statistics, epistemology, and logic. Meta-analysis is presented not only as a statistical tool, but as a means of supporting intellectual inquiry and collaborative theory-building. The article calls for greater integration of meta-analytic methods into education research, emphasizing their potential to enhance the quality, comparability, and transparency of scientific knowledge.en
dc.description.abstractArtykuł analizuje rolę metaanalizy i systematycznego przeglądu literatury w rozwijaniu i doskonaleniu teorii empirycznych w naukach o edukacji. Podkreśla wartość tych metod w syntezowaniu wyników badań, identyfikowaniu wzorców oraz zwiększaniu spójności i mocy eksplanacyjnej teorii. Zwraca też uwagę na środowiskowy sceptycyzm, zwłaszcza wobec metaanalizy. Choć metaanaliza jest szeroko stosowana w podejściach opartych na dowodach, jej wykorzystanie w badaniach edukacyjnych bywa lokalnie ograniczone – głównie z powodu obaw dotyczących jakości danych, heterogeniczności metod, stronniczości publikacyjnej oraz spostrzeganej niekompatybilności epistemicznej z podejściami konstruktywistycznymi lub interpretatywnymi. Autor przekonuje, że wyzwania te można przezwyciężyć dzięki rygorowi metodologicznemu, transparentności danych, właściwemu kontekstualizowaniu oraz interdyscyplinarnemu przygotowaniu z zakresu statystyki, epistemologii i logiki. Metaanaliza przedstawiana jest nie jako narzędzie wyłącznie statystyczne, lecz jako wsparcie dla intelektualnych dociekań i współpracy teoretycznej. Artykuł apeluje o silniejsze włączenie metaanalizy w badania edukacyjne, podkreślając jej potencjał dla poprawy jakości, porównywalności i przejrzystości wiedzy naukowej.pl
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherWydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiegopl
dc.relation.ispartofseriesNauki o Wychowaniu. Studia Interdyscyplinarne;1pl
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
dc.subjectevidence-based approachen
dc.subjectmeta-analysisen
dc.subjecttheoryen
dc.subjectsystematic literature reviewen
dc.subjectpodejście oparte na dowodachpl
dc.subjectmetaanalizapl
dc.subjectteoriapl
dc.subjectsystematyczny przegląd literaturypl
dc.titleMeta-analysis for Supporting Empirical Theories in Educational Sciencesen
dc.title.alternativeMetaanaliza dla wsparcia teorii empirycznych w naukach o edukacjipl
dc.typeArticle
dc.page.number45-55
dc.contributor.authorAffiliationUniversity of Lodzen
dc.identifier.eissn2450-4491
dc.referencesAudigier V., White I. R., Jolani S., Debray T. P. A., Quartagno M., Carpenter J., Resche-Rigon M. (2018) Multiple Imputation for Multilevel Data with Continuous and Binary Variables, “Statistical Science”, no. 33, pp. 160–183, https://doi.org/10.1214/18-STS646en
dc.referencesBartoš F., Maier M., Wagenmakers E., Doucouliagos H., Stanley T. D. (2023) Robust Bayesian Meta‐Analysis: Model‐Averaging Across Complementary Publication Bias Adjustment Methods, Research Synthesis Methods, no. 14(1), pp. 99–116, https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1594en
dc.referencesCumming G., Calin-Jageman R. (2017) Introduction to the New Statistics. Estimation, Open Science, and Beyond, New York, NY – London, Routledge, https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315708607en
dc.referencesGajda A., Karwowski M., Beghetto R.A. (2017) Creativity and Academic Achievement: A Meta-Analysis, Journal of Educational Psychology, no. 109, pp. 269–299, https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000133en
dc.referencesGosling C.J., Solanes A., Fusar-Poli P., Radua J. (2023) Metaumbrella: the First Comprehensive Suite to Perform Data Analysis in Umbrella Reviews with Stratification of the Evidence, BMJ Mental Health, no. 26, pp. 1–8, https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjment-2022-300534en
dc.referencesGough D., Oliver S., Thomas J. (2017) An Introduction to Systematic Reviews, London, Sage.en
dc.referencesGrund S., Ludtke O., Robitzsch A. (2018) Multiple Imputation of Missing Data for Multilevel Models: Simulations and Recommendations, Organizational Research Methods, no. 21, pp. 111–149, https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428117703686en
dc.referencesHarrer M., Cuijpers P., Furukawa T. A., Ebert D. D. (2022) Doing Meta-Analysis with R. A Hands-On Guide, London – New York, NY, Taylor & Francis Group, https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003107347en
dc.referencesHattie J. (2008) Visible Learning: A Synthesis of Over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement, London – New York, NY, Routledge.en
dc.referencesHempel C. G. (1964) Fundamentals of Concept Formation in Empirical Science, Chicago, IL – London, University of Chicago Press.en
dc.referencesHempel C. G. (1965) Aspects of Scientific Explanation and Other Essays in the Philosophy of Science, New York, NY, Free Press.en
dc.referencesHeyvaert M., Maes B., Onghena P. (2011) Applying Mixed Methods Research at the Synthesis Level: An Overview, Research in the Schools, no. 18(1), pp. 12–24.en
dc.referencesHong Q. N., Pluye P., Bujold M., Wassef M. (2017) Convergent and Sequential Synthesis Designs: Implications for Conducting and Reporting Systematic Reviews of Qualitative and Quantitative Evidence, Systematic Reviews, no. 6(1):61, https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-017-0454-2en
dc.referencesIoannidis J. P. A. (2009) Integration of Evidence from Multiple Meta-Analyses: A Primer on Umbrella Reviews, Treatment Networks and Multiple Treatments Meta-Analyses, Canadian Medical Association Journal, no. 181(8), pp. 488–493, https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.081086en
dc.referencesLakatos I. (1989) The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.en
dc.referencesLeón S. P., Garrido M. G., Martínez I. G., Lipnevich A. (2025) Passing TPACK through the Metascience Circle: A Meta-analytic Systematic Review of the Application of the Model, May 14, preprint, https://doi.org/10.35542/osf.io/c5qsr_v1en
dc.referencesLeón S. P., Lipnevich A., Garrido M. G. (2025) Is All That Glitters Gold? Meta-analytical Systematic Review of the Effect of the Montessori, April 7, preprint, https://doi.org/10.35542/osf.io/mf9ec_v1en
dc.referencesLeón S. P., Panadero E., García-Martínez I. (2023) How Accurate Are Our Students? A Meta-Analytic Systematic Review on Self-assessment Scoring Accuracy, Educational Psychology Review, no. 35:106, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09819-0.en
dc.referencesMerton R. K. (2017) Social Theory and Social Structure, New York, NY, Free Press.en
dc.referencesMoher D., Liberati A., Tetzlaff J., Altman D. G., Prisma Group (2009) Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: the PRISMA Statement, PLoS Medicine, no. 6(7), e1000097, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097en
dc.referencesPage M. J., Higgins J. P. T., Sterne J. A. C. (2019) Assessing Risk of Bias Due to Missing Results in a Synthesis, in: Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, J. P. T. Higgins, J. Thomas, J. Chandler, M. Cumpston, T. Li, M. J. Page, V. A. Welch (eds.), Oxford, The Cochrane Collaboration and John Wiley & Sons, https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119536604.ch13en
dc.referencesPrzełęcki M. (1988) Logika teorii empirycznych, Warszawa, Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.en
dc.referencesPigott T. D., Polanin J. R. (2019) Methodological Guidance Paper: High-Quality Meta-Analysis in a Systematic Review, Review of Educational Research, no. 90(1), pp. 24–46, https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654319877153en
dc.referencesPopper K. R. (2002) The Logic of Scientific Discovery, London – New York, NY, Routledge.en
dc.referencesReichenbach H. (1963) The Rise of Scientific Philosophy, Berkeley & Los Angeles, University of California Press.en
dc.referencesSandelowski M., Barroso J. (2007) Handbook for Synthesizing Qualitative Research, New York, NY, Springer.en
dc.referencesSchmidt F. L. (1992) What Do Data Really Mean? Research Findings, Meta-Analysis, and Cumulative Knowledge in Psychology, American Psychologist, no. 47(10), pp. 1173–1181, https://doi.org/10.1037//0003-066X.47.10.1173en
dc.referencesShea B. J., Reeves B. C., Wells G., Thuku M., Hamel C., Moran J., Moher D., Tugwell P., Welch V., Kristjansson E., Henry D. A. (2017) AMSTAR 2: A Critical Appraisal Tool for Systematic Reviews That Include Randomised or Non-Randomised Studies of Healthcare Interventions, or Both, BMJ, 358:j4008, https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j4008en
dc.referencesSlim K., Marquillier T. (2022) Umbrella Reviews: A New Tool to Synthesize Scientific Evidence in Surgery, Journal of Visceral Surgery, no. 159(2), pp. 144–149, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jviscsurg.2021.10.001en
dc.referencesvan Fraassen B. C. (2004) The Scientific Image, Oxford, Oxford University Press.en
dc.referencesVevea J. L., Hedges L. V. (1995) A General Linear Model for Estimating Effect Size in the Presence of Publication Bias, Psychometrika, no. 60, pp. 419–435, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02294384en
dc.referencesWiśniewska E., Karwowski M. (2007) Efektywność treningów twórczości – podejście metaanalityczne, Ruch Pedagogiczny, no. 3–4, pp. 31–50.en
dc.referencesWittgenstein L. (1958) Philosophical Investigations, New York, NY, Macmillan Publishing Co.en
dc.contributor.authorEmailpasikowski@now.uni.lodz.pl
dc.identifier.doi10.18778/2450-4491.20.05
dc.relation.volume20


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0