Stereotype threat is a widely cited psychological phenomenon with purported important real-world consequences. Reanalysis of data from the Nguyen and Ryan (2008) stereotype threat meta-analysis indicated the presence of small study effects in which the effect size for less precise studies was larger than the effect size for more precise studies. Four methods to adjust the meta-analysis effect size for potential publication bias produced divergent estimates, from essentially no change, to a 50% decrease, to a reduction of the estimated effect size to near zero. Caution is therefore warranted both for citing Nguyen and Ryan (2008) as evidence of a meaningful stereotype threat effect and for claiming that the stereotype threat effect size is negligible based on these adjustments, given that the detected small study effects might be due to unexplored moderators instead of publication bias. (PsycINFO Database Record

This study reports results from a new analysis of 17 survey experiment studies that permitted assessment of racial discrimination, drawn from the archives of the Time-sharing Experiments for the Social Sciences. For White participants (n=10 435), pooled results did not detect a net discrimination for or against White targets, but, for Black participants (n=2781), pooled results indicated the presence of a small-to-moderate net discrimination in favor of Black targets; inferences were the same for the subset of studies that had a political candidate target and the subset of studies that had a worker or job applicant target. These results have implications for understanding racial discrimination in the United States, and, given that some of the studies have never been fully reported on in a journal or academic book, the results also suggest the need for preregistration to reduce or eliminate publication bias in racial discrimination studies.

Research indicates that senators evaluate U.S. Supreme Court nominations on two ideological dimensions: the distance between themselves and the nominee, and the potential effect confirmation would have on the Court median. My analysis of nominations from 1968 to 2006 provides evidence that senators are also influenced by the ideological contrast between the nominee and the departing justice.

No abstract

Objective. List experiment respondents may misreport the number of list items that they associate with in order to associate themselves with a socially desirable test item or to disassociate themselves from a socially undesirable test item. Tests for such misreporting were conducted. Methods. List experiments from the 1991 National Race and Politics Survey, the 2006 Cooperative Congressional Election Study, and the 2008 Cooperative Campaign Analysis Project were analyzed or reviewed. Results. Evidence suggested that some respondents deflated their report more than necessary to avoid association with a socially undesirable test item. Conclusions. List experiments may provide inaccurate estimates of the percentage of the population to which the test item applies, but the direction of bias is predictable.