I need to perform the average of a set of correlation coefficients $\rho_i$ with $i=1,\ldots,m$. I follow the standard prescription:
- apply the Fisher z-transformation to my $\rho_i$ ($z_i$ are the z-transformed correlations)
- perform the mean $\bar{z}$ of the $z_i$
- and then apply the inverse transformation to $\bar{z}$ to obtain the mean correlation $\bar{\rho}$.
My question is about the mean at point 2. It is known that the $z_i$s approximately follow a Gaussian distribution with standard deviation $\sigma_{z_i}=1/\sqrt{n_i-3}$ where $n_i$ is the sample size which has been used to estimate $\rho_i$. I am working in a setup (that I cannot avoid) with samples with very different $n_i$ and this translates in significantly different standard deviations of my $z_i$ ($n_{max}/n_{min}\approx 20$).
Should I do a simple mean of my $z_i$ or it is preferable, in a such a scenario, to perform a weighted mean of the $z_i$ where the weights are the inverse of $\sigma_{z_i}$, namely $\bar{z} = \sum_i z_i\sigma_{z_i}^{-1}/\sum_i\sigma_{z_i}^{-1}$?
I went through the literature of the Fisher transform but I cannot find any clue on this specific point.
A way to rephrase my question is: are there any known results on an extra step of stabilization of the correlation sample variance by performing a weighted mean of the $z_i$ using the the inverse of the $\sigma_{z_i}$ as weights because, differently from $\sigma_{\rho_i}$, the $\sigma_{z_i}$ have the nice feature that they do not depend on $\rho_i$