How does a PhD student go about doing a meta analysis of a research question?

Good luck to you. I'm trying to do something similar and found that few HCI papers publish enough summary statistics to conduct a proper meta-analysis. Indeed, a lot of the time, their stats seem quite sloppy.

I've styled my analysis similar to two review papers I found. One from the HCI area as well (Dehn & Van Mulken, 2000) and one from a bit more outfield (Jones & Gosling, 2005).

Neither is a true meta-analysis, but they get as close to formal as I think it's reasonable to get when an actual meta-analysis is simply not an option.

• Dehn & Van Mulken (2000) The impact of animated interface agents: a review of empirical research
• Jones & Gosling (2005) Temperament and personality in dogs (Canis familiaris): A review and evaluation of past research

One take on this, regardless of field, is to create a framework to place the existing research in. Perhaps you have two dimensions, colour (red, green, yellow) and smell (sweet, sour) - and you review all the prior literatures and place it into your framework 'buckets'.

What this is really doing, and why you want this in your dissertation, is setting up your contribution. By classifying all the prior research, you will have (hopefully!) identified a hole, which your work is going to fill. So... choose your buckets carefully!

ps, I realize this is not a statistical answer - but I hope this is of use, or perhaps sheds some light that will help you see a useful way forward.

I really second the use of the Cochrane Collaboration website for meta-analysis and systematic review.

Another good resource is the PRISMA checklist which is often used for journals and reviewers in health fields when evaluating papers. PRISMA also has good guidelines for how to format/present your included papers and create a flow diagram of your review process (again, often required in health-related journals). Good luck!