References
- Bargh, J. A., Chen, M., & Burrows, L. (1996). Automaticity of social behavior: Direct effects of trait construct and stereotype activation on action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(2), 230–244. DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.71.2.230
- Baumeister, R. F. (2016). Charting the future of social psychology on stormy seas: Winners, losers, and recommendations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 66, 153–158. DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2016.02.003
- Bem, D. J. (2011). Feeling the future: experimental evidence for anomalous retroactive influences on cognition and affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 407–425. DOI: 10.1037/a0021524
- Blanton, H., & Ikizer, E. G. (2018).
The Bullet-point Bias: How Diluted science communications can impede social progress . In Crawford, J. T., & Jussim, L. (Eds.), The politics of social psychology (pp. 168–190). New York: Psychology Press. DOI: 10.4324/9781315112619-11 - Blaser, M. J. (1996). The Bacteria behind Ulcers. Scientific American, 274(2), 104–107. DOI: 10.1038/scientificamerican0296-104
- Brunner, J., & Schimmack, U. (2017). How replicable is psychology? A comparison of four methods of estimating replicability on the basis of test statistics in original studies. Unpublished manuscript.
- Chambers, C. (2017). The Seven Deadly Sins of Psychology: A Manifesto for Reforming the Culture of Scientific Practice. Princeton University Press. DOI: 10.1515/9781400884940
- Chopik, W. J., Bremner, R. H., Defever, A. M., & Keller, V. N. (2018). How (and Whether) to Teach Undergraduates About the Replication Crisis in Psychological Science. Teaching of Psychology, 45(2), 158–163. DOI: 10.1177/0098628318762900
- Cialdini, R. B., & Goldstein, N. (2004). Social influence: Compliance and conformity. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 591–621. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.142015
- Corker, K. (2019). Strengths and weaknesses of meta-analysis. Unpublished manuscript. DOI: 10.31234/osf.io/6gcnm
- Edwards, M. A., & Roy, S. (2017). Academic research in the 21st century: Maintaining scientific integrity in a climate of perverse incentives and hypercompetition. Environmental Engineering Science, 34, 51–61. DOI: 10.1089/ees.2016.0223
- Fiedler, K. (2017). What constitutes strong psychological theory? The (neglected) role of diagnosticity and a priori theorizing. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12, 46–61. DOI: 10.1177/1745691616654458
- Fiedler, K., Messner, C., & Bluemke, M. (2006). Unresolved problems with the “I”, the “A”, and the “T”: A logical and psychometric critique of the Implicit Association Test (IAT). European Review of Social Psychology, 17(1), 74–147. DOI: 10.1080/10463280600681248
- Finnigan, K. M., & Corker, K. S. (2016). Do performance avoidance goals moderate the effect of different types of stereotype threat on women’s math performance? Journal of Research in Personality, 63, 36–43. DOI: 10.1016/j.jrp.2016.05.009
- Flore, P. C., Mulder, J., & Wicherts, J. M. (2019). The influence of gender stereotype threat on mathematics test scores of Dutch high school students: a registered report. Comprehensive Results in Social Psychology, 1–35. DOI: 10.1080/23743603.2018.1559647
- Fraley, R. C., & Vazire, S. (2014). The N-Pact Factor: Evaluating the Quality of Empirical Journals with Respect to Sample Size and Statistical Power. PLoS ONE 9(10):
e109019 . DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0109019 - Funder, D. C., Levin, J. M., Mackie, D. M., Morf, C. C., Sansone, C., Vazire, S., & West, S. G. (2014). Improving the dependability of research in personality and social psychology: Recommendations for research and educational practice. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 18, 3–12. DOI: 10.1177/1088868313507536
- Gelman, A. (2016). What’s happened here is the winds have changed. Retrieved on 3/15/18 from:
http://andrewgelman.com/2016/09/21/what-has-happened-down-here-is-the-winds-have-changed/ . - Gilbert, D. T., King, G., Pettigrew, S., & Wilson, T. D. (2016). Comment on “Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science.” Science, 351, 1037-a. DOI: 10.1126/science.aad7243
- Giner-Sorolla, R. (2012). Science or art? How aesthetic standards grease the way through the publication bottleneck but undermine science. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 562–571. DOI: 10.1177/1745691612457576
- Gould, S. J. (1981). Evolution as fact and theory. Retrieved on 2/1/18 from:
http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/gould_fact-and-theory.html . - Hanselman, P., Rozek, C. S., Grigg, J., & Borman, G. D. (2017). New Evidence on Self-affirmation Effects and Theorized Sources of Heterogeneity from Large-Scale Replications. Journal of Educational Psychology, 109(3), 405–424. DOI: 10.1037/edu0000141
- Hunter, J. (2012). Post-publication peer review: opening up scientific conversation. Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, 6, 1–2. DOI: 10.3389/fncom.2012.00063
- Inbar, Y., & Lammers, J. (2012). Political diversity in social and personality psychology. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 496–503. DOI: 10.1177/1745691612448792
- Ioannidis, J. P. (2012). Why science is not necessarily self-correcting. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(6), 645–654. DOI: 10.1177/1745691612464056
- John, L. K., Loewenstein, G., & Prelec, D. (2012). Measuring the prevalence of questionable research practices with incentives for truth telling. Psychological Science, 25, 524–532. DOI: 10.1177/0956797611430953
- Jussim, L. (2012). Social perception and social reality: Why accuracy dominates bias and self-fulfilling prophecy. New York: Oxford University Press. DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195366600.001.0001
- Jussim, L., Crawford, J. T., Anglin, S. M., Stevens, S. M., & Duarte, J. L. (2016). Interpretations and methods: Towards a more effectively self-correcting social psychology. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 66, 116–133. DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2015.10.003
- Kahan, D. M., Peters, E., Wittlin, M., Slovic, P., Ouelette, L. L., Braman, D., & Mandel, G. (2012). The polarizing impact of science literacy and numeracy on perceived climate change risks. Nature: Climate Change, 2, 732–735. DOI: 10.1038/nclimate1547
- Kerr, N. L. (1998). HARKing: Hypothesizing after the results are known. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2, 196–217. DOI: 10.1207/s15327957pspr0203_4
- Kidwell, M. C., et al. (2016). Badges to acknowledge open practices: A simple, low-cost, effective method for increasing transparency. PloS Biology, 1–5. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1002456
- Lane, K. A., Banaji, M. R., Nosek, B. A., & Greenwald, A. G. (2007).
Understanding and using the implicit association test: IV. What we know (so far) about the Method . In Wittenbrink, B., & Schwarz, N. (Eds.), Implicit Methods (pp. 59–101). New York: Guilford Press. - Lerner, J. S., & Tetlock, P. E. (1999). Accounting for the effects of accountability. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 255–275. DOI: 10.1037/0033-2909.125.2.255
- Lilienfeld, S. O. (2017). Microaggressions: Strong Claims, Inadequate Evidence. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12(1), 138–169. DOI: 10.1177/1745691616659391
- Loeb, A. (2014). The benefits of diversity. Nature: Physics, 10, 16–17. DOI: 10.1038/nphys3089
- Merton, R. K. (1973). The sociology of science: Theoretical and empirical investigations. N. W. Storer (Ed.). Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
- Mitchell, G. (2018).
Jumping to conclusions: Advocacy and application of psychological research . In Crawford, J. T., & Jussim, L. (Eds.), The politics of social psychology. New York: Psychology Press. DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780190687328.003.0016 - Munafò, M. R., Nosek, B. A., Bishop, D. V. M., Button, K. S., Chambers, C. D., Percie du Sert, N., Simonsohn, U., Wagenmakers, E., Ware, J. J., & Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2017). A manifesto for reproducible science. Nature Human Behavior, 1. DOI: 10.1038/s41562-016-0021
- Nelson, L., Simmons, J., & Simonsohn, U. (2018). Psychology’s renaissance. Annual Review of Psychology, 69, 511–534. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-psych-122216-011836
- Nosek, B., Spies, J. R., & Motyl, M. (2012). Scientific Utopia II. Restructuring incentives and practices to promote truth over publishability. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 615–631. DOI: 10.1177/1745691612459058
- Nuitjen, M. B., Borghuis, J., Veldkamp, C. L. S., Dominguez-Alvarez, L., van Assen, M. A. L. M., & Wicherts, J. M. (2017). Journal data sharing polices and statistical reporting inconsistencies in psychology. Collabra, 3, 1–22. DOI: 10.1525/collabra.102
- Odutayo, A., Emdin, C. A., Hsiao, A. J., Shakir, M., Copsey, B., Dutton, S., Hopewell, S., et al. (2017). Association between trial registration and positive study findings: cross sectional study (Epidemiological Study of Randomized Trials—ESORT). BMJ, 356, j917. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.j917
- Open Science Collaboration. (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349, 943. DOI: 10.1126/science.aac4716
- Popper, K. (1959). The logic of scientific discovery. New York, NY: Routledge. DOI: 10.1063/1.3060577
- Roberts, B. (2019). Its déjà vu all over again. Retrieved on March 17, 2019 from:
https://pigee.wordpress.com/2019/03/11/its-deja-vu-all-over-again/ . - Schimmack, U. (2014). Quantifying statistical research integrity: The Replicability-Index. Unpublished manuscript.
- Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., & Simonsohn, U. (2011). False-positive psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant. Psychological Science, 22, 1359–1366. DOI: 10.1177/0956797611417632
- Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., & Simonsohn, U. (2012). A 21 word solution. Dialogues. DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2160588
- Simmons, J. P., & Simonsohn, U. (2017). Power Posing: P-Curving the Evidence. Psychological Science, 28(5), 687–693. DOI: 10.1177/0956797616658563
- Spellman, B. A. (2015). A Short (Personal) Future History of Revolution 2.0. Perspectives On Psychological Science, 10, 886–899. DOI: 10.1177/1745691615609918
- Sumner, P., Vivian-Griffiths, S., Boivin, J., Williams, A., Venetis, C. A., Davies, A., Chambers, C. D., et al. (2014). The association between exaggeration in health related science news and academic press releases: retrospective observational study. BMJ, 349, g7015. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.g7015
- Sumner, P., Vivian-Griffiths, S., Bolvin, J., Williams, A., Bott, L., Adams, R., Chambers, C. D., et al. (2016). Exaggerations and caveats in press releases and health-related science news. PloS One, 11.
e0168217 . DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0168217 - van Elk, M., Matzke, D., Gronau, Q. F., Guan, M., Vandekerckhove, J., & Wagenmakers, E. J. (2015). Meta-analyses are no substitute for registered replications: a skeptical perspective on religious priming. Frontiers in Psychology, 6. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01365
- Vazire, S. (2017). Quality uncertainty erodes trust in science. Collabra: Psychology, 3. DOI: 10.1525/collabra.74
- Vosgerau, J., Simonsohn, U., Nelson, L. D., & Simmons, J. P. (2018). Internal Meta-Analysis Makes False-Positives Easier To Produce and Harder To Correct (SSRN Scholarly Paper No. ID 3271372). Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network. Retrieved from
https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=3271372 . DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.3271372 - Wagenmakers, E. J., & Gronau, Q. (2017). Two pitfalls of pre-registration: The case of ego depletion. Retrieved on 3/16/18 from
https://www.bayesianspectacles.org/two-pitfalls-of-preregistration-the-case-of-ego-depletion/ . - Warren, M. (2018). First analysis of ‘pre-registered’ studies shows sharp rise in null findings. Nature News, October 24. DOI: 10.1038/d41586-018-07118-1
- Wicherts, J. M., Bakker, M., & Molenaar, D. (2011). Willingness to share research data is related to the strength of the evidence and the quality of reporting of statistical results. PLoS One, 6,
e26828 . DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0026828 - Yap, S. C. Y., Wortman, J., Anusic, I., Baker, S. G., Scherer, L. D., Donnellan, M. B., & Lucas, R. E. (2017). The effect of mood on judgments of subjective well-being: Nine tests of the judgment model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113(6), 939–961. DOI: 10.1037/pspp0000115