Skip to main content

Table 7 Alternative estimates of publication selection bias–corrected effect size

From: Gender wage gap in European emerging markets: a meta-analytic perspective

Method

Top 10a

Selection modelb

Endogeneous

kinked modelc

p -uniformd

Model

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

Publication selection bias-corrected effect size

− 0.1034***

(0.011)

− 0.1490***

(0.010)

− 0.0875***

(0.004)

− 0.0968***

(0.001)

K

67

670

670

670

  1. This table reports the alternative estimation results of the publication selection bias–corrected effect size using estimates of the gender dummy variable reported in 53 research works listed in Additional file 1: Table S1 and Additional file 2: Bibliography of studies subject to meta-analysis as the dependent variable using the FAT–PET–PEESE procudure. See Table 1 for the descriptive statistics of the estimates. The Appendix describes the methodology applied in this table. Figures in parentheses are standard errors
  2. *** denotes that the coefficient is statistically significantly different from zero at the 1% level
  3. aArithmetic average of the top 10% most precise estimates (Stanley et al. 2010)
  4. bTest for publication selection bias using the conditional probability of publication as a function of a study’s results (Andrews and Kasy 2019)
  5. cPiecewise linear meta-regression of estimates on their standard errors with a kink at the cutoff value of the standard error below which publication selection bias is unlikely (Bom and Rachinger 2019)
  6. dMethod based on the statistical theory that the distribution of p -values is uniform conditional on the population effect size (van Aert and van Assen 2021)