One Hundred Years of Social Psychology Quantitatively Described

Richard, F; Bond, Charles F.; Stokes-Zoota, Juli J.

doi:10.1037/1089-2680.7.4.331

Cited by 1,387 publications

(1,067 citation statements)

References 317 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

964

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The direction of these effects is consistent with the notion that interracial interaction outcomes can be hindered by racial bias or intergroup anxiety (e.g., Dovidio, 2001;Shelton & Richeson, 2006b;Trawalter et al, 2009). At the same time, the magnitude of effect sizes was quite small, whether assessed with more traditional guidelines (Cohen, 1988) or recently developed empirically based guidelines (Hemphill, 2003;Lipsey & Wilson, 1993;Richard, Bond, & Stokes-Zoota, 2003). Richard et al, for example, examined hundreds of meta-analyses and found the average social psychological effect size to be r ϭ .21, while ours ranged from r ϭ .07 to .10.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 68%

Dyadic interracial interactions: A meta-analysis

Babbitt¹,

Toosi²,

Ambady³

et al. 2011

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This meta-analysis examined over 40 years of research on interracial interactions by exploring 4 types of outcomes: explicit attitudes toward interaction partners, participants' self-reports of their own emotional state, nonverbal or observed behavior, and objective measures of performance. Data were collected from 108 samples (N ϭ 12,463) comparing dyadic interracial and same-race interactions, predominantly featuring Black and White Americans. Effect sizes were small: Participants in same-race dyads tended to express marginally more positive attitudes about their partners (r ϭ .07), reported feeling less negative affect (r ϭ .10), showed more friendly nonverbal behavior (r ϭ .09), and scored higher on performance measures (r ϭ .07) than those in interracial dyads. Effect sizes also showed substantial heterogeneity, and further analyses indicated that intersectional, contextual, and relational factors moderated these outcomes. For example, when members of a dyad were the same sex, differences between interracial and same-race dyads in negative affect were reduced. Structured interactions led to more egalitarian performance outcomes than did free-form interactions, but the effects of interaction structure on nonverbal behavior depended on participant gender. Furthermore, benefits of intergroup contact were apparent: Differences in emotional state across dyadic racial composition disappeared in longer term interactions, and racial minorities, who often have greater experience with intergroup contact, experienced less negative affect in interracial interactions than did majority group members. Finally, there was a significant historical trend toward more egalitarian outcomes across dyadic racial composition for explicit attitudes and for nonverbal behavior; however, participants' emotional responses and performance have remained consistent.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 68%

Dyadic interracial interactions: A meta-analysis

Babbitt¹,

Toosi²,

Ambady³

et al. 2011

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This subset of 11 studies was rated higher on contextual sensitivity (mean = 3.73) than studies in which the original researchers expected their results to be replicated successfully or in which they did not make a prediction about replication (mean = 2.80, P < 0.001). Although there are numerous reasons an author may express concerns about § A meta-analysis of 322 meta-analytic investigations of social psychological phenomena observed that the average effect in social psychology had an effect size of r = 0.21 (73). It is interesting that a similar effect of context holds even in this set of direct replication attempts.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…However, it is important to note that contextual sensitivity does not necessarily suggest a lack of robustness or reproducibility. For instance, contextual variation is itself incredibly robust in some areas of research (73). Furthermore, contextual sensitivity is sufficient but not necessary for variation in the likelihood of replication.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contextual sensitivity in scientific reproducibility

Bavel

Mende-Siedlecki

Brady

et al. 2016

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

365

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

“…To increase the generalizability of results, we sought to recruit non-student samples and consider non-"WEIRD" (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich and Democratic) societies (Henrich, Heine, & Norenzayan, 2010). We sought to analyze datasets with at least 173 participants, which would provide 80% power to detect an effect of r = .21-the typical effect in social/personality psychology (Richard, Bond Jr., & Stokes-Zoota, 2003; see also Vazire, 2015).…”

Section: Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

What inverted U can do for your country: A curvilinear relationship between confidence in the social system and political engagement.

Cichocka

Górska

Jost

et al. 2018

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examined the link between political engagement and the tendency to justify the sociopolitical system. On one hand, confidence in the system should be negatively related to political engagement, insofar as it entails reduced desire for social change; on the other hand, system confidence should also be positively related to political engagement to the extent that it carries an assumption that the system is responsive to citizens' political efforts. Because of the combination of these 2 opposing forces, the motivation for political engagement should be highest at intermediate levels of system confidence. Five studies revealed a negative quadratic relationship between system confidence and normative political engagement. In 2 representative surveys, Polish participants with moderate levels of system confidence were more likely to vote in political elections (Study 1) and to participate in solidarity-based collective action (Study 2). Two field studies demonstrated a negative quadratic relationship between system confidence and actual participation in political demonstrations (gender equality and teachers' protests in Poland; Studies 3 and 4). This pattern of results was further corroborated by analyses of data from 50 countries drawn from the World Value Survey: we observed negative quadratic relationships between system confidence and collective action as well as voting. These relationships were stronger in democratic (vs. nondemocratic) regimes (Study 5). Our results suggest that some degree of system confidence might be useful to stimulate political engagement within the norms of the system.

show abstract

One Hundred Years of Social Psychology Quantitatively Described

Cited by 1,387 publications

References 317 publications

Dyadic interracial interactions: A meta-analysis

Dyadic interracial interactions: A meta-analysis

Contextual sensitivity in scientific reproducibility

What inverted U can do for your country: A curvilinear relationship between confidence in the social system and political engagement.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About