Research synthesis methods 

Aims and scope

Research synthesis techniques such as systematic reviews and meta-analyses have become standard methods for aggregating the results from thematically related research in psychology. They can be used to describe the state of the art in a research field, to test and/or compare theories, and to derive conclusions about the effectiveness of interventions.

The overall aim of our research is to address hotspot topics in any subfield of psychology and related areas with the aid of research synthesis methods. Furthermore, we aim to further develop research synthesis methods. The topics covered include, but are not limited to:

  • Systematic reviews and meta-analyses contributing to the recent discussion on replicability, transparency, and research integrity in psychology;
  • Meta-analytic replications and extensions of previously published syntheses, e.g., by applying more recent approaches and/or by including more recent primary studies;
  • Methodological advances in research synthesis methods relevant for any subfield of psychology;
  • Quality appraisal systems for primary, secondary, and meta-analytic studies;
  • Meta-analytic structural equation modeling (MASEM).

Research projects

Meta-analytic approaches to synthesize Big Data

(together with Mike Cheung, National University of Singapore)

Joint Project: Mechanisms of Panel Conditioning in Longitudinal Studies: Reflection, Satisficing, and Social Desirability

(together with GESIS Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences)

Research panel conditioning systematic review

(together with Bella Struminskaya, Utrecht University)

Evidence-based data collection methodology

(together with Prof. Dr. Katja Lozar Manfreda and Prof. Dr. Valentina Hlebec, University of Ljubljana)



Research Synthesis and Big Data in Psychology, May 17-21, 2021, online:
Videos and presentations

Research Synthesis incl. Pre-Conference Symposium: Big Data in Psychology, May 27-31, 2019, Dubrovnik, Croatia:
Videos and presentations

Research Synthesis 2018, June 10-12, 2018, Trier, Germany:
Videos and presentations

Edited volumes and series

Zeitschrift für Psychologie, Hotspots in Psychology

2022 edition 

Call for papers 

2021 edition
Call for papers 

2020 edition
Call for papers 

2019 edition
Call for papers

2018 edition
Call for papers

2016 edition
Call for papers

Bosnjak, M. Cheung, M., & Viechtbauer, W. (Eds.)

Systematic reviews and meta-analysis.

Springer Briefs Edited Series

Selected publications

Burgard, T., Bosnjak, M., & Studtrucker, R. (accepted).

Community-Augmented Meta-Analyses (CAMAs) in Psychology. Potentials and Current Systems.

Zeitschrift für Psychologie.

Steinmetz, H., Bosnjak, M., & Isidor, R. (2020).

Meta-analytische Strukturgleichungsmodelle: Potenziale und Grenzen illustriert an einem Beispiel aus der Organisationspsychologie.

Psychologische Rundschau, 71(2), 111–118.

Burgard, T., Bosnjak, M., & Wedderhoff, N. (2020).

Konditionierungseffekte in Panel-Untersuchungen: Systematische Übersichtsarbeit und Meta-Analyse am Beispiel sensitiver Fragen.

Psychologische Rundschau, 71(2), 89-95.

Burgard, T., Bosnjak, M. & Wedderhoff, N. (2020).

Response rates in online surveys with affective disorder participants. A meta-analysis of study design and time effects between 2008 and 2019.

Psychologische Rundschau, 228(1), 14-24.

Emmer, C., Bosnjak, M., & Mata, J. (2019).

The association between weight stigma and mental health: A meta-analysis.

Obesity Reviews, 1-13.

Daikeler, J., Bosnjak, M., & Lozar-Manfreda, K. (2019).

Web versus other survey modes: An updated and extended meta-analysis comparing response rates.

Journal of Survey Statistics and Methodology, 1-27.

Knezevic, G., Lazarevic, L., Puric, D., Bosnjak, M., Teovanovic, P., Petrovic, B., & Opacic, G. (2019).

Does Eysenck's personality model capture psychosis-proneness? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Personality and Individual Differences, 143, 155-164.

Čehovin, G., Bosnjak, M., & Lozar-Manfreda, K. (2018).

Meta-analyses in survey methodology: A systematic review.

Public Opinion Quarterly, 82(4), 641–660.

Cornesse, C., & Bosnjak, M. (2018).

Is there an association between survey characteristics and representativeness? A meta-analysis.

Survey Research Methods, 12(1), 1-13.

Kaiser, A., Kuhlmann, B. G., & Bosnjak, M. (2018).

A meta-analysis of inhibitory-control deficits in patients diagnosed with Alzheimer's dementia.

Neuropsychology, 32(5), 615-633.

Lazarevic, L., Bosnjak, M., Knezevic, G., Petrovic, B., Puric, D., Teovanovic, P., Opacic, G., & Bodroza, B. (2016).

Disintegration as an additional trait in the psychobiological model of personality: Assessing discriminant validity via meta-analysis.

Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 224(3), 204-215.

Knezevic, G., Lazarevic, L., Bosnjak, M., Puric, D., Petrovic, B., Teovanovic, P., Opacic, G., & Bodroza, B. (2016).

Towards a personality model encompassing a disintegration factor separate from the big five traits: A meta-analysis of the empirical evidence.

Personality and Individual Differences, 95, 214-222.

Aguirre-Rodriguez, A., Bosnjak, M., & Sirgy, M. J. (2012).

Moderators of the self-congruity effect on consumer decision-making: A meta-analysis.

Journal of Business Research, 65(8), 1179-1188.

Bosnjak, M., & Viechtbauer, W. (2009).

Die Methode der Meta-Analyse zur Evidenzbasierung von Gesundheitsrisiken: Beiträge der Sozial-, Verhaltens- und Wirtschaftswissenschaften.

Zentralblatt für Arbeitsmedizin, Arbeitsschutz und Ergonomie, 59(11), 322-333.

Lozar Manfreda, K., Bosnjak, M., Berzelak, J., Haas, I., & Vehovar, V. (2008).

Web surveys versus other survey modes: A meta-analysis comparing response rates.

International Journal of Market Research, 50(1), 79-104.


Visiting researchers

Cooperation partners

  • Prof. Dr. Mike Cheung
    National University of Singapore
  • Prof. Dr. Katja Lozar Manfreda
    University of Ljubljana
  • Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Viechtbauer
    Maastricht University
  • Dr. Bernd Weiß
    GESIS - Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences