TABLE 5.

Pooled effect size between PES and criterion variables.

	Effect size 95% CI			Heterogeneity			Fail-safe N	Egger’s regression
Variables	r	Low	Up	Q(8)	p	I2	n	Intercept	t(7)	p
1. Behavioral synchrony	0.64	0.586	0.695	40.57	<0.001	80.28	3,266	–1.79	0.99	0.355
2. Intense positive emotions	0.61	0.567	0.657	23.84	0.002	66.44	2,800	0.41	0.28	0.788
3. Self-transcendent emotions	0.65	0.599	0.697	33.58	<0.001	76.18	3,305	–0.20	0.11	0.923
4. Self-transcendent experience	0.65	0.602	0.697	31.83	<0.001	74.87	3,403	–2.25	1.51	0.175
5. Situated social identity	0.59	0.517	0.652	51.35	<0.001	84.42	2,632	–2.81	1.48	0.183
6. Identity fusion demonstrators	0.43	0.365	0.492	28.05	<0.001	71.48	1,184	–1.62	1.09	0.310
7. Identity fusion feminist	0.40	0.312	0.476	45.46	<0.001	82.40	1,010	–1.79	0.93	0.383
8. Solidarity with women	0.43	0.361	0.489	28.31	<0.001	71.74	1,179	–2.11	1.50	0.176
9. Identity fusion women	0.24	0.201	0.286	10.22	0.250	21.72	328	–0.09	0.09	0.927
10. Collective efficacy	0.40	0.368	0.430	3.42	0.905	0.00	932	–0.79	1.66	0.140
11. Positive individual growth	0.41	0.335	0.478	34.94	<0.001	77.10	1,087	–2.52	1.66	0.141
12. Positive collective growth	0.47	0.407	0.523	25.23	0.001	68.30	1,431	–2.03	1.55	0.166
13. Pro-women behavior	0.41	0.333	0.483	38.82	<0.001	79.39	1,099	–2.42	1.47	0.185

N = 2,843, k = 9, number of studies included in the analysis. Fail-safe N indicates Rosenthal’s fail-safe N analysis. PES, perceived emotional synchrony.