期刊文献+

生态学整合分析中两种常用效应值的实例应用比较 被引量:8

Comparison of two effect sizes of meta-analysis commonly used in ecology
下载PDF
导出
摘要 整合分析(meta-analysis)是对同一主题下多个独立实验结果进行综合的统计学方法,被认为是到目前为止最好的数量综合方法,其统计量为效应值,反应比(InR)和Hedges'd值是生态学应用中最常用的两个效应值。以综合植物生理生态学指标对大气CO2浓度倍增响应为实例,比较这两种效应值的不同之处。采用两种效应值指标会对同一个生理生态指标产生不同的总效应值大小,有时甚至会改变效应值的方向;InR相对Hedges'd更易产生正效应值;Hedges'd 较InR可拉大不同生理生态指标之间总效应值的差异;Hedges'd具有正负效应对称性,而InR却具有正负效应的不对称性。 Meta-analysis is a statistical method to summarize the different individual studies under the same subject. lnR and Hedges'd are the two effect sizes that are most commonly used in ecology. They are compared in analyzing response of plant ecophysilogical variables to high CO2 concentration. For the same variable, two effect size might result in different overall effect size and even occasionally change its direction. LnR was apt to lead to positive effect. The range of overall effect sizes of 24 variables given by Hedges'd was wider than that by lnR. Effect size given by LnR was asymmetry, while that by Hedges'd symmetry.
出处 《生态科学》 CSCD 2005年第3期250-253,共4页 Ecological Science
基金 广东省团队项目(003031)国家自然科学基金项目(30270282)
关键词 整合分析 效应值 INR Hedges’d Meta-analysis Effect size InR Hedges'd
  • 相关文献

参考文献8

二级参考文献24

  • 1胡克震.Meta分析简介──同类研究结果综合再分析的统计方法[J].大连医科大学学报,1995,17(3):229-232. 被引量:9
  • 2赵宁,俞顺章.Meta-analysis(元分析)I.Meta-analysis基本概念与内容[J].山西医学院学报,1995,26(3):203-205. 被引量:11
  • 3Goldberg D E, Rajaniemi T. 1999. Empirical approaches to quantifying interaction intensity: Competition and facilitation along productivity gradients[J]. Ecology,80:1118-1131
  • 4Cooper H M. 1998. Synthesizing research: a guide for literature review. (3rd ed.) [M]. Thousand Oaks: Sage.88-95.
  • 5Williams P A, Haertel E H. 1982. The Impact of leisure time television on school learning: A research synthesis[J].American Educational Research Journal. 19(41): 19-50.
  • 6Gurevitch J, Hedges V. 1993. Meta-analysis combining the results of independent experiments[M]. New York: Chapman & Hall. 114-119.
  • 7Hedges V, Olkins I. 1985. Statistical Methods for Meta-Analysis[M]. New York: Academic Press. 55-59.
  • 8Gurevitch J, Hedges L V. 1999. Statistical issues in ecological meta-analyses[J]. Ecology, 80:1142-1149.
  • 9Greeland S. 1987. Quantitative methods in the review of epidemiologic literature[J]. Epidemiologic Reviews, 9:1-30.
  • 10彭少麟,生态学杂志,1998年,17卷,6期,74页

共引文献145

同被引文献172

引证文献8

二级引证文献53

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部