Meta-analysis is a powerful tool in sport and exercise psychology. However, it has a number of pitfalls, and some lead to ill-advised comparisons and overestimation of effects. The impetus for this research note is provided by a recent systematic review of meta-analyses that examined the correlates of sport performance and has fallen foul of some of the pitfalls. Although the systematic review potentially has great value for researchers and practitioners alike, it treats effects from correlational and intervention studies as yielding equivalent information, double-counts multiple studies, and uses an effect size for correlational studies (Cohen’s d) that provides an extreme contrast of unclear practical relevance. These issues impact interpretability, bias, and usefulness of the findings. This methodological note explains each pitfall and illustrates use of an appropriate equivalent effect size for correlational studies (Mathur and VanderWeele’s d) to help researchers avoid similar issues in future work.

荟萃分析是运动和运动心理学的强大工具。然而，它有许多缺陷，有些会导致不明智的比较和高估效果。这篇研究报告的动力来自最近对荟萃分析的系统回顾，该分析检查了运动表现的相关性，并发现了一些陷阱。尽管系统评价对于研究人员和从业者来说可能具有巨大价值，但它将相关研究和干预研究的影响视为产生相同的信息，重复计算多项研究，并使用相关研究的效应大小（Cohen's d）来提供极端的对比实际相关性不明确。这些问题影响研究结果的可解释性、偏见和有用性。该方法说明解释了每个陷阱，并说明了在相关研究中使用适当的等效效应大小（Mathur 和 VanderWeele 的d），以帮助研究人员在未来的工作中避免类似问题。