Hello,

the right way to go is a three-level-meta analysis where correlations are nested in studies.

Cheng, C., Cheung, M. W. L., & Lo, B. C. Y. (2016). Relationship of health locus of control with specific health behaviours and global health appraisal: A meta-analysis and effects of moderators. Health Psychology Review, 10(4), 460-471. doi:10.1080/17437199.2016.1219672

Cheung, M. W. L. (2014). Modeling dependent effect sizes with three-level meta-analyses: A structural equation modeling approach. Psychological Methods, 19(2), 211-229. doi:10.1037/a0032968

Cheung, M. W. L. (2015). Metasem: An R package for meta-analysis using structural equation modeling. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 1-7. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01521

Steinmetz, H., Knappstein, M., Ajzen, I., Schmidt, P., & Kabst, R. (2016). How effective are behavior change interventions based on the theory of planned behavior? A three-level meta-analysis. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 224(3), 216-233. doi:10.1027/2151-2604/a000255

Van den Noortgate, W., López-López, J. A., Marín-Martínez, F., & Sánchez-Meca, J. (2013). Three-level meta-analysis of dependent effect sizes. Behavior Research Methods, 45(2), 576-594. doi:10.3758/s13428-012-0261-6

Van den Noortgate, W., López-López, J. A., Marín-Martínez, F., & Sánchez-Meca, J. (2014). Meta-analysis of multiple outcomes: A multilevel approach. Behavior Research Methods(10), 1-22. doi:10.3758/s13428-014-0527-2

HTH

--Holger

I suggest you consider each of the reported coefficients as a separate study. You can not integrate them (using greatest or average).

Babak, please see my post (it is always good practice to read threads in which one posts).

Best,

Holger