<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<collection xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim http://www.loc.gov/standards/marcxml/schema/MARC21slim.xsd" xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim">
 <record>
  <leader>00000caa a22000003a 4500</leader>
  <controlfield tag="001">UP-8027390931312519145</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="003">Buklod</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="005">20200407101332.0</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="006">o--- |     ||   ||</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="007">ta</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="008">200407s        xx     d     r    |||| u|</controlfield>
  <datafield tag="022" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">0033-2909</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">(iLib)UPCEB-00011919575</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">Edz</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">Bosch, Holger.</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="245" ind1="0" ind2="4">
   <subfield code="a">In the Eye of the Beholder</subfield>
   <subfield code="b">Reply to Wilson and Shadish (2006) and Radin, Nelson, Dobyns, and Houtkooper (2006). [article].</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">pp.533-537.</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">H, Bosch, F. Steinkamp, and E. Boller's (2006) meta-analysis, which demonstrated (a) a small but highly significant overall effect, (b) a small- study effect, and (c) extreme heterogeneity has provked widely differing responses. After considering D. B. Wilson and  W. R. Shadish's (2006) and D. Radin, R. Nelson, Y Dobyns, and J. Houtkooper's (2006) concern about the possible effects of psychological moderator variables, the potential for missing data, and the difficulties inherent in any meta-analytic data, the authors reaffirm their view that publication bias is the most parsimonious model to account  for all 3 findings. However, until compulsory registration of trials occurs, it cannot be proven that the effect is in fact attributable to publication bias, and it remains up to the indiviudual reader to decide how the results are best and most parsimonously interpreted.  -- (from the author)</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="650" ind1="1" ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Meta-analysis.</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="650" ind1="1" ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Psychokinesis.</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="650" ind1="1" ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Random number generator.</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="650" ind1="1" ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Small-study effect.</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="650" ind1="1" ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Publication bias.</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">Psychological Bulletin.</subfield>
   <subfield code="g">vol. 132, 4 ( 2006).</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="942" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">Analytics</subfield>
  </datafield>
 </record>
</collection>
