An Investigation of Abstract Construal on Impression Formation: A Multi-Lab Replication of McCarthy and Skowronski (2011)

McCarthy, Randy J.; Hartnett, Jessica L.; Heider, Jeremy D.; Scherer, Cory R.; Wood, Sarah E.; Nichols, Austin; Edlund, John E.; Walker, W. Richard

doi:10.5334/irsp.133

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Open Science Collaboration (2015) replicated 100 findings from 2008 issues of three psychology journals and observed 36% achieved significance in the same direction with effect sizes 49% as large as the original studies. "Multi-site replications" include the series titled "Many Labs" (Ebersole et al, , 2020Klein et al, 2014Klein et al, , 2018Klein et al, , 2019, registered replication reports primarily from the journal Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science (Alogna et al, 2014;Bouwmeester et al, 2017;Cheung et al, 2016;Colling et al, 2020;Eerland et al, 2016;Hagger et al, 2016;McCarthy, Skowronski, et al, 2018;O'Donnell et al, 2018;Verschuere et al, 2018;Wagenmakers et al, 2016), papers from the Collaborative Replications and Education Project (Ghelfi et al, 2020;Leighton et al, 2018;Wagge et al, 2018), and other similar efforts (Dang et al, 2021;ManyBabies Consortium, 2020;Mccarthy et al, 2020;McCarthy, Hartnett, et al, 2018;Moran et al, 2020;Schweinsberg et al, 2016). Collectively (n = 77), 56% of multisite replications reported statistically significant evidence in the same direction with effect sizes 53% as large as the original studies ( Figure 1).…”

Section: The State Of Replicability Of Psychological Sciencementioning

confidence: 99%

Replicability, Robustness, and Reproducibility in Psychological Science

Nosek¹,

Hardwicke²,

Moshontz³

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Replication, an important, uncommon, and misunderstood practice, is making a comeback in psychology. Achieving replicability is a necessary but not sufficient condition for making research progress. If findings are not replicable, then prediction and theory development are stifled. If findings are replicable, then interrogation of their meaning and validity can advance knowledge. Assessing replicability can be productive for generating and testing hypotheses by actively confronting current understanding to identify weaknesses and spur innovation. For psychology, the 2010s might be characterized as a decade of active confrontation. Systematic and multi-site replication projects assessed current understanding and observed surprising failures to replicate many published findings. Replication efforts also highlighted sociocultural challenges, such as disincentives to conduct replications, framing of replication as personal attack rather than healthy scientific practice, and headwinds for replication contributing to self-correction. Nevertheless, innovation in doing and understanding replication, and its cousins, reproducibility and robustness, have positioned psychology to improve research practices and accelerate progress.

show abstract

Section: The State Of Replicability Of Psychological Sciencementioning

confidence: 99%

Replicability, Robustness, and Reproducibility in Psychological Science

Nosek¹,

Hardwicke²,

Moshontz³

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

What about the Male Victims? Exploring the Impact of Gender Stereotyping on Implicit Attitudes and Behavioural Intentions Associated with Intimate Partner Violence

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Replicability, Robustness, and Reproducibility in Psychological Science

Nosek

Hardwicke

Moshontz

et al. 2022

Annu. Rev. Psychol.

373

244

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Replication—an important, uncommon, and misunderstood practice—is gaining appreciation in psychology. Achieving replicability is important for making research progress. If findings are not replicable, then prediction and theory development are stifled. If findings are replicable, then interrogation of their meaning and validity can advance knowledge. Assessing replicability can be productive for generating and testing hypotheses by actively confronting current understandings to identify weaknesses and spur innovation. For psychology, the 2010s might be characterized as a decade of active confrontation. Systematic and multi-site replication projects assessed current understandings and observed surprising failures to replicate many published findings. Replication efforts highlighted sociocultural challenges such as disincentives to conduct replications and a tendency to frame replication as a personal attack rather than a healthy scientific practice, and they raised awareness that replication contributes to self-correction. Nevertheless, innovation in doing and understanding replication and its cousins, reproducibility and robustness, has positioned psychology to improve research practices and accelerate progress. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Psychology, Volume 73 is January 2022. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.

show abstract

An Investigation of Abstract Construal on Impression Formation: A Multi-Lab Replication of McCarthy and Skowronski (2011)

Cited by 3 publications

References 16 publications

Replicability, Robustness, and Reproducibility in Psychological Science

Replicability, Robustness, and Reproducibility in Psychological Science

What about the Male Victims? Exploring the Impact of Gender Stereotyping on Implicit Attitudes and Behavioural Intentions Associated with Intimate Partner Violence

Replicability, Robustness, and Reproducibility in Psychological Science

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About