Evidence of the File Drawer/Publication Bias Problem in Organization Research: An Affirmative Replication of Dalton, Aguinis, Dalton, Bosco, and Pierce (2012)

The file drawer problem and related publication bias have effect when research not published for reasons including statistically nonsignificant results, small effects, or small samples, is overlooked when collecting studies for quantitative meta-analyses, resulting in meta-analytic estimates that are larger than true effects. In a replication of a study by Dalton, Aguinis, Dalton, Bosco, & Pierce, (2012), I examined the implications of this problem for meta-analytic research in the organization sciences. In the replication, I compared mean effects from 23 recent meta-analyses of organization research that included both published and unpublished data with mean effects provided by the meta-analyses' authors that included published data alone. In failing to produce evidence of a file drawer/publication bias problem after accounting for possible Type 1 error, the comparisons in my study provided additional evidence that was consistent with the conclusion reached by Dalton and colleagues that the file drawer problem and related publication bias are not as prevalent in organizational research as has sometimes been suggested.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Psychological Reports
Published
2025-10-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/00332941251389578
Primary Topic
Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Evidence of the File Drawer/Publication Bias Problem in Organization Research: An Affirmative Replication of Dalton, Aguinis, Dalton, Bosco, and Pierce (2012)

John A. Wagner
Psychological Reports
Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
article

Evidence of the File Drawer/Publication Bias Problem in Organization Research: An Affirmative Replication of Dalton, Aguinis, Dalton, Bosco, and Pierce (2012)

John A. Wagner
article en

Abstract

The file drawer problem and related publication bias have effect when research not published for reasons including statistically nonsignificant results, small effects, or small samples, is overlooked when collecting studies for quantitative meta-analyses, resulting in meta-analytic estimates that are larger than true effects. In a replication of a study by Dalton, Aguinis, Dalton, Bosco, & Pierce, (2012), I examined the implications of this problem for meta-analytic research in the organization sciences. In the replication, I compared mean effects from 23 recent meta-analyses of organization research that included both published and unpublished data with mean effects provided by the meta-analyses' authors that included published data alone. In failing to produce evidence of a file drawer/publication bias problem after accounting for possible Type 1 error, the comparisons in my study provided additional evidence that was consistent with the conclusion reached by Dalton and colleagues that the file drawer problem and related publication bias are not as prevalent in organizational research as has sometimes been suggested.

Psychological Reports
Michigan State University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 69%
Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Evidence of the File Drawer/Publication Bias Problem in Organization Research: An Affirmative Replication of Dalton, Aguinis, Dalton, Bosco, and Pierce (2012) — John A. Wagner · Psychological Reports (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS