“…We analyzed all 130 papers with the updated codebook. During this fnal analysis, a further n=11 papers were excluded: Four papers did not feature statistical inferences, and were therefore deemed false positives [15,31,47,74]; two studies used exploratory factor analyses [109,161], which (unlike NHST) are designed for exploratory analyses; fnally, fve papers did not employ NHST when reporting results [125,171,173], or only reported non-signifcant results without further information on the statistical analysis [119,175]. This resulted in a fnal sample of N=119 papers, which forms the basis of our systematic review results.…”