Judging near and distant virtue and vice

Eyal, Tal; Liberman, Nira; Trope, Yaacov

doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2008.03.012

Cited by 311 publications

(312 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

273

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The raters were unaware of the results of replication attempts. Before coding any studies, the coders practiced their rating scheme on an independent set of four studies addressed in other replication efforts (63)(64)(65)(66). This practice ensured that each coder rated contextual sensitivity in a similar and consistent fashion.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contextual sensitivity in scientific reproducibility

Bavel

Mende-Siedlecki

Brady

et al. 2016

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

364

313

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, scientists have paid increasing attention to reproducibility. For example, the Reproducibility Project, a large-scale replication attempt of 100 studies published in top psychology journals found that only 39% could be unambiguously reproduced. There is a growing consensus among scientists that the lack of reproducibility in psychology and other fields stems from various methodological factors, including low statistical power, researcher's degrees of freedom, and an emphasis on publishing surprising positive results. However, there is a contentious debate about the extent to which failures to reproduce certain results might also reflect contextual differences (often termed "hidden moderators") between the original research and the replication attempt. Although psychologists have found extensive evidence that contextual factors alter behavior, some have argued that context is unlikely to influence the results of direct replications precisely because these studies use the same methods as those used in the original research. To help resolve this debate, we recoded the 100 original studies from the Reproducibility Project on the extent to which the research topic of each study was contextually sensitive. Results suggested that the contextual sensitivity of the research topic was associated with replication success, even after statistically adjusting for several methodological characteristics (e.g., statistical power, effect size). The association between contextual sensitivity and replication success did not differ across psychological subdisciplines. These results suggest that researchers, replicators, and consumers should be mindful of contextual factors that might influence a psychological process. We offer several guidelines for dealing with contextual sensitivity in reproducibility.replication | reproducibility | context | psychology | meta-science I n recent years, scientists have paid increasing attention to reproducibility. Unsuccessful attempts to replicate findings in genetics (1), pharmacology (2), oncology (3), biology (4), and economics (5) have given credence to previous speculation that most published research findings are false (6). Indeed, since the launch of the clinicaltrials.gov registry in 2000, which forced researchers to preregister their methods and outcome measures, the percentage of large heart-disease clinical trials reporting significant positive results plummeted from 57% to a mere 8% (7). The costs of such irreproducible preclinical research, estimated at $28 billion in the United States (8), are staggering. In a similar vein, psychologists have expressed growing concern regarding the reproducibility and validity of psychological research (e.g., refs. 9-14). This emphasis on reproducibility has produced a number of failures to replicate prominent studies, leading professional societies and government funding agencies such as the National Science Foundation to form subcommittees promoting more robust research practices (15).The Reproducibility Project in psychology has b...

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contextual sensitivity in scientific reproducibility

Bavel

Mende-Siedlecki

Brady

et al. 2016

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

364

313

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similarly, transgressions that occur in distant situations (e.g., in future or related to others) are considered to have moral implications more often than transgressions occurring in the immediate surrounding. Therefore, moral failures at a distance are judged more harshly [33]. When the action gets real, values become weak determinants, and incidental and situational aspects have a greater impact on behavior, which suggests values often predict distant intentions rather than actual behaviors [34].…”

Section: Construal Level Theory (Clt) Of Psychological Distancementioning

confidence: 99%

Is the Privacy Paradox a Matter of Psychological Distance? An Exploratory Study of the Privacy Paradox from a Construal Level Theory Perspective

Bandara¹,

Fernando²,

Akter³

2018

Proceedings of the 51st Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The first way asserts that moral principles and values constitute high-level constructs (Eyal, Liberman, & Trope, 2008). This is based on the notion that values are often represented as abstract and superordinate constructs that are central to one's identity (e.g., Kristiansen & Hotte, 1996;Verplanken & Holland, 2002).…”

Section: Efpsamentioning

confidence: 99%

Construal Level Theory and Moral Judgments: How Thinking Abstractly Modifies Morality

Mårtensson

2017

Journal of European Psychology Students

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research based on construal level theory has shown that whether objects and events are construed as abstract or concrete is a major factor in influencing people's moral judgments. The aim of this literature review is to describe and evaluate empirical research that has investigated the relationship between construal level and moral judgments. Although most reviewed studies show that abstract thinking leads to stronger moral judgments, inconsistencies exist and gaps in the literature remain. This is due to methodological limitations and differences in theoretical standpoints, which will subsequently be discussed. Suggestions for future research are offered.

show abstract

Judging near and distant virtue and vice

Cited by 311 publications

References 27 publications

Contextual sensitivity in scientific reproducibility

Contextual sensitivity in scientific reproducibility

Is the Privacy Paradox a Matter of Psychological Distance? An Exploratory Study of the Privacy Paradox from a Construal Level Theory Perspective

Construal Level Theory and Moral Judgments: How Thinking Abstractly Modifies Morality

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About