Registered Replication Report

Eerland, Anita; Sherrill, Andrew M.; Magliano, Joseph P.; Zwaan, Rolf A.; Arnal, Jack; Aucoin, Philip; Berger, Stephanie; Birt, Angela R.; Capezza, Nicole M.; Carlucci, Marianna; Crocker, C.; Ferretti, Todd R.; Kibbe, Mackenzie; Knepp, Michael; Kurby, Christopher A.; Melcher, Joseph M.; Michael, Stephen W.; Poirier, Christopher R.; Prenoveau, Jason M.

doi:10.1177/1745691615605826

Cited by 64 publications

(71 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Other multi-lab initiatives also failed to replicate key findings in psychology (Alogna et al, 2014;Eerland et al, 2016;Hagger et al, 2016;Wagenmakers et al, 2016) There are several possible explanations for the low replicability rates in psychology.…”

Section: Replicability In Psychologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As we showed in Chapter 7, replications are informative if they have high power and are not affected by publication bias and related biases caused by researcher degrees of freedom. One way to ensure both is through Registered Replication Reports (RRR; Association for Psychological Science, n.d.; examples are Alogna et al, 2014;Eerland et al, 2016;Wagenmakers et al, 2016). In an RRR, researchers first submit a preregistration of the research plan, which is then reviewed by peer reviewers and the author(s) of the original study.…”

Section: Replicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Research on Research: A Meta-Scientific Study of Problems and Solutions in Psychological Science

Nuijten¹

2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARY DOCTORAL DISSERTATION: Psychology is facing a “replication crisis”. Many psychological findings could not be replicated in novel samples, which lead to the growing concern that many published findings are overly optimistic or even false. In this dissertation, we investigated potential indicators of problems in the published psychological literature. In Part I of this dissertation, we looked at inconsistencies in reported statistical results in published psychology papers. To facilitate our research, we developed the free tool statcheck; a “spellchecker” for statistics. In Part II, we investigated bias in published effect sizes. We showed that in the presence of publication bias, the overestimation of effects can become worse if you combine studies. Indeed, in meta-analyses from the social sciences we found strong evidence that published effects are overestimated. These are worrying findings, and it is important to think about concrete solutions to improve the quality of psychological research. Some of the solutions we propose are preregistration, replication, and transparency. We argue that to select the best strategies to improve psychological science, we need research on research: meta-research.

show abstract

Section: Replicability In Psychologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Replicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Research on Research: A Meta-Scientific Study of Problems and Solutions in Psychological Science

Nuijten¹

2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A recent estimate is that fewer than half of the findings in cognitive and social psychology are reproducible (Open Science Collaboration, 2015). In addition, there have been several been high-profile, preregistered, multi-lab failures to replicate wellknown effects psychology (Eerland et al, 2016;Hagger et al, 2016;Wagenmakers et al, 2016). A similar multi-lab replication psychology that was considered successful yielded an effect size that was much smaller than the original (Alogna et al 2014).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Participant Nonnaiveté and the reproducibility of cognitive psychology

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many argue that there is a reproducibility crisis in psychology. We investigated nine well-known effects from the cognitive psychology literature-three each from the domains of perception/action, memory, and language, respectively-and found that they are highly reproducible. Not only can they be reproduced in online environments, but they also can be reproduced with nonnaïve participants with no reduction of effect size. Apparently, some cognitive tasks are so constraining that they encapsulate behavior from external influences, such as testing situation and prior recent experience with the experiment to yield highly robust effects.

show abstract

“…It is important to note that Experiments 1 and 2 in this article were conducted in 2012, before we had initiated a registered replication report of the Hart and Albarracín study (Eerland et al, 2016). A meta-analysis of the results from 11 different labs failed to replicate the result of Hart and Albarracín (2011).…”

mentioning

confidence: 90%

The Blame Game: An investigation of Grammatical Aspect and Blame Judgments

Eerland

Sherrill

Magliano

et al. 2017

Collabra: Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Imperfective aspect (i.e., Mark was punching John) is interpreted by the language processing system as a dynamic, unfolding sequence of actions, whereas perfective aspect (i.e., Mark punched John) is interpreted as a complete whole. A recent study showed that grammatical aspect can influence perceptions of intentionality for criminal actions (Hart & Albarracín, 2011). The current study builds on this finding. Five experiments examine whether grammatical aspect can also influence perceptions of blame, a concept related to intentionality. There were no effects of grammatical aspect on judgments of blame but the results showed an effect of narrated order (Experiments 1-3). First-mentioned actions made the agent more to blame for the outcomes than last-mentioned actions. This effect was not due to the order of the blame questions (Experiment 2) or influenced by the chronological order of the events (Experiment 3). Experiments 4 and 5 showed strong effects of grammatical aspect on temporal dynamics and revealed an interesting new finding. Grammatical aspect can influence the mental representation of a non-mentioned action. We discuss our results in light of the current literature on grammatical aspect effects.

show abstract

Registered Replication Report

Cited by 64 publications

References 18 publications

Research on Research: A Meta-Scientific Study of Problems and Solutions in Psychological Science

Research on Research: A Meta-Scientific Study of Problems and Solutions in Psychological Science

Participant Nonnaiveté and the reproducibility of cognitive psychology

The Blame Game: An investigation of Grammatical Aspect and Blame Judgments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About