Registered Replication Report on Srull and Wyer (1979)

Abstract

Srull and Wyer (1979) demonstrated that exposing participants to more hostility-related stimuli caused them subsequently to interpret ambiguous behaviors as more hostile. In their Experiment 1, participants descrambled sets of words to form sentences. In one condition, 80% of the descrambled sentences described hostile behaviors, and in another condition, 20% described hostile behaviors. Following the descrambling task, all participants read a vignette about a man named Donald who behaved in an ambiguously hostile manner and then rated him on a set of personality traits. Next, participants rated the hostility of various ambiguously hostile behaviors (all ratings on scales from 0 to 10). Participants who descrambled mostly hostile sentences rated Donald and the ambiguous behaviors as approximately 3 scale points more hostile than did those who descrambled mostly neutral sentences. This Registered Replication Report describes the results of 26 independent replications (N = 7,373 in the total sample; k = 22 labs and N = 5,610 in the

Analyzing data of a multilab replication project with individual participant data meta-analysis: A tutorial

“…These results exactly match those of Figure 1 in [16]. The average true effect size estimate is equal toμ = 0.083 (95% confidence interval (CI) [0.004;0.161]), and the null-hypothesis of no effect was rejected (z = 2.058, two-tailed p-value = 0.040).…”

“…The RRR by McCarthy and colleagues [16] replicated the study by Scrull and Wyer [20] on assimilative priming. Assimilative priming refers to the idea that "exposure to priming stimuli causes subsequent judgements to incorporate more of the qualities of the primed construct" [16]. In the replicated experiment, participants were first asked to perform a sentence construction task where either 20% or 80% of the sentences described hostile behavior.…”

“…The study was replicated in 22 labs and the total sample size was 7,373. See [16] for more details. All analyses were conducted in the statistical software R [21], the R package papaja [22] was used for writing the paper,…”

“…Before turning to IPD meta-analysis, I will first provide an example of an ecological fallacy in a meta-regression model. Subsequently, I will introduce the RRR by McCarthy and colleagues [16] that will be used for illustrating the methods and explain how these data are commonly analyzed using conventional random-effects meta-analysis. The paper ends with a conclusion section that contains recommendations for analyzing data of a multi-lab replication project.…”

NSF 19-609 Proposal: Evaluating Rigor and Transparency Culture Change Initiatives

“…The project was so successful that the model became a permanent feature of a new journal (Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science) launched by the same editor and publisher without any associated funder partnership. The mechanism has published some of the most prominent papers in the last few years examining reproducibility of psychological science (e.g., Hagger et al, 2016;Klein et al, 2018;McCarthy et al, 2018;Verschuere et al, 2018;Wagenmakers et al, 2016). • American National Election Studies Pre-Acceptance Challenge: With support from the Laura and John Arnold Foundation, organizers recruited multiple political science journals to participate in a Registered Reports initiative for 2016 American National Election Studies data that had not yet been released.…”