We conducted preregistered replications of 28 classic and contemporary published findings, with protocols that were peer reviewed in advance, to examine variation in effect magnitudes across samples and settings. Each protocol was administered to approximately half of 125 samples that comprised 15,305 participants from 36 countries and territories. Using the conventional criterion of statistical significance ( p < .05), we found that 15 (54%) of the replications provided evidence of a statistically significant effect in the same direction as the original finding. With a strict significance criterion ( p < .0001), 14 (50%) of the replications still provided such evidence, a reflection of the extremely high-powered design. Seven (25%) of the replications yielded effect sizes larger than the original ones, and 21 (75%) yielded effect sizes smaller than the original ones. The median comparable Cohen’s ds were 0.60 for the original findings and 0.15 for the replications. The effect sizes were small (< 0.20) in 16 of the replications (57%), and 9 effects (32%) were in the direction opposite the direction of the original effect. Across settings, the Q statistic indicated significant heterogeneity in 11 (39%) of the replication effects, and most of those were among the findings with the largest overall effect sizes; only 1 effect that was near zero in the aggregate showed significant heterogeneity according to this measure. Only 1 effect had a tau value greater than .20, an indication of moderate heterogeneity. Eight others had tau values near or slightly above .10, an indication of slight heterogeneity. Moderation tests indicated that very little heterogeneity was attributable to the order in which the tasks were performed or whether the tasks were administered in lab versus online. Exploratory comparisons revealed little heterogeneity between Western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic (WEIRD) cultures and less WEIRD cultures (i.e., cultures with relatively high and low WEIRDness scores, respectively). Cumulatively, variability in the observed effect sizes was attributable more to the effect being studied than to the sample or setting in which it was studied.

We conducted preregistered replications of 28 classic and contemporary published findings with protocols that were peer reviewed in advance to examine variation in effect magnitudes across sample and setting. Each protocol was administered to approximately half of 125 samples and 15,305 total participants from 36 countries and territories. Using conventional statistical significance (p &lt; .05), fifteen (54%) of the replications provided evidence in the same direction and statistically significant as the original finding. With a strict significance criterion (p &lt; .0001), fourteen (50%) provide such evidence reflecting the extremely high powered design. Seven (25%) of the replications had effect sizes larger than the original finding and 21 (75%) had effect sizes smaller than the original finding. The median comparable Cohen’s d effect sizes for original findings was 0.60 and for replications was 0.15. Sixteen replications (57%) had small effect sizes (&lt; .20) and 9 (32%) were in the opposite direction from the original finding. Across settings, 11 (39%) showed significant heterogeneity using the Q statistic and most of those were among the findings eliciting the largest overall effect sizes; only one effect that was near zero in the aggregate showed significant heterogeneity. Only one effect showed a Tau &gt; 0.20 indicating moderate heterogeneity. Nine others had a Tau near or slightly above 0.10 indicating slight heterogeneity. In moderation tests, very little heterogeneity was attributable to task order, administration in lab versus online, and exploratory WEIRD versus less WEIRD culture comparisons. Cumulatively, variability in observed effect sizes was more attributable to the effect being studied than the sample or setting in which it was studied.

We conducted an online survey and interviews amongst mental health workers in Canada who reported experience in working with rural and remote First Nations (although not necessarily telemental health). Sixty-three respondents (of the 164) to the online survey reported experience in working with clients in remote and rural First Nations. Only 16 of the online survey respondents with remote and rural First Nations experience reported having received training in videoconferencing use. When asked how frequently they used videoconferencing with clients, 51% reported never using it, 19% used it once every few months and 10% reported using it a few times a month. Approximately 50% of participants reported finding it useful. Approximately 38% found the technology easy or very easy to use, and 15% found it very difficult. Individual in-depth interviews were also conducted with professionals who had First Nations telemental health experience specifically (n = 5). A quantitative data analysis was used to explore their perceptions of usefulness and ease of use of telemental health, as well as the relationships among these constructs. Advantages, disadvantages and challenges in using the technology were identified from the qualitative data. Promising ways forward include incorporating traditional practices and the Seven Teachings into telemental health services.

Equal access to mental health services is necessary for healthy individuals and communities. However, due to geographical distances and other barriers, some clients cannot easily access mental health professionals. Technologies such as videoconferencing for clinical purposes (i.e., telemental health) may help to bridge these gaps to connect clients and clinicians at geographically diverse locations. However, despite its potential utility, telemental health has not been widely adopted in Canada. This study is an exploratory investigation into mental health professionals' attitudes toward telemental health, factors that affect the frequency with which they use this technology, and their perceptions of individual characteristics that make clients more or less suitable candidates for telemental health. This study has a particular focus on remote and rural and Operational Stress Injury (OSI) contexts. One hundred sixty mental health workers across Canada participated in an online survey, and 25 mental health workers from Operational Stress Injury clinics across Canada participated in in-person interviews. The data were examined using qualitative and quantitative analysis methods. Findings suggest that mental health workers have overall positive attitudes toward the use of telemental health-particularly for clients in remote and rural locations. Additionally, receiving training in telemental health, being in the mental health field for longer, and perceiving the technology as easy to use are associated with more frequent use of telemental health. Finally, clinicians reported specific client characteristics that they perceive to make some clients unsuitable candidates for telemental health. Implications of these findings and directions for future research are discussed.

No abstract