This study explores how researchers’ analytical choices affect the reliability of scientific findings. Most discussions of reliability problems in science focus on systematic biases. We broaden the lens to emphasize the idiosyncrasy of conscious and unconscious decisions that researchers make during data analysis. We coordinated 161 researchers in 73 research teams and observed their research decisions as they used the same data to independently test the same prominent social science hypothesis: that greater immigration reduces support for social policies among the public. In this typical case of social science research, research teams reported both widely diverging numerical findings and substantive conclusions despite identical start conditions. Researchers’ expertise, prior beliefs, and expectations barely predict the wide variation in research outcomes. More than 95% of the total variance in numerical results remains unexplained even after qualitative coding of all identifiable decisions in each team’s workflow. This reveals a universe of uncertainty that remains hidden when considering a single study in isolation. The idiosyncratic nature of how researchers’ results and conclusions varied is a previously underappreciated explanation for why many scientific hypotheses remain contested. These results call for greater epistemic humility and clarity in reporting scientific findings.

The current experimental study (N = 546) compares the effect of exposure to a television news story with a positive and negative tone on anti-immigrant attitudes and carry-over effects to uninvolved immigrant groups. Results reveal that exposure to a negatively valenced news story about North African immigrants increased negative attitudes toward that same group. Importantly, however, we find carry-over effects of exposure to a positively valenced news story about North African immigrants to attitudes toward uninvolved immigrant groups.Together these findings show that the effect of exposure to television news tone has more ramifications than previously thought, and that the impact of exposure to a positive or negative news story differs for direct effects vis-à-vis carry-over effects.

The aim of this study is twofold. First, we expand on the literature by testing whether generalized trust is negatively related to anti-immigrant sentiments in Europe. Second, we examine to what extent the relation between generalized trust and anti-immigrant sentiments is dependent upon cross-group friendships. We apply multilevel linear regression modeling to representative survey data enriched with levels of ethnic diversity covering 21 European countries. Results show that both generalized trust and cross-group friendship are negatively related to anti-immigrant sentiments. However, there is a negligible positive relation between generalized trust and cross-group friendship (r = .10), and we can clearly observe that they operate independently from one another. Hence, trusting actors are not more likely to form more cross-group friendships, and cross-group friendship do not lead to the development of more generalized trust. Instead, the findings show that generalized trust leads immigrants too to be included in the radius of trusted others and, as a consequence, the benign effects of generalized trust apply to them as well. We conclude that the strength of generalized trust is a form of generalization, beyond the confines of individual variations in intergroup experiences.

The present paper examines the relative influence of religion and nation on conceptions of virtues. In a first study, conducted in the Netherlands, 926 respondents of different profession, age, sex, and religious background rank ordered a list of 15 virtues. A comparison of Dutch Muslims and non-Muslims showed a remarkably high resemblance in their ratings of virtues. Only faith was rated as being much more important by Muslims than by non-Muslims. In the second study, the influence of national cultures was examined. Adults (N = 795) from two culturally relatively similar countries, Germany and the Netherlands, and from Spain rated the same list of virtues. Crossnational differences between the two Northern European countries and Spain by far exceeded the influence of religion on the importance ratings of virtues. The implications of the findings for the often-mentioned clash of religions are discussed. Currently, the influence of religion on the values of immigrants may be overemphasized and other important characteristics may be underestimated.

No abstract