The random effects prep continues to mispredict the probability of replication

Psychonomic Bulletin and Review

Volumn 17, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 270-272

  Iverson, Geoffrey J ^a   Lee, Michael D ^a   Wagenmakers, Eric Jan ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 77957345386     PISSN: 10699384     EISSN: 15315320     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/PBR.17.2.270     Document Type: Note

References (5)

1. Iverson, G. J., Lee, M. D., & Wagenmakers, E. (2009). prep misestimates the probability of replication. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16, 424-429.
2. Iverson, G. J., Lee, M. D., Zhang, S., & Wagenmakers, E. (2009). prep: An agony in five fits. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 53, 195-202.
3. Iverson, G. J., Wagenmakers, E., & Lee, M. D. (in press). A model averaging approach to replication: The case of prep. Psychological Methods.
4. Killeen, P. R. (2005). An alternative to null-hypothesis significance tests. Psychological Science, 16, 345-353.
5. Lecoutre, B., & Killeen, P. R. (2010). Replication is not coincidence: Reply to Iverson, Lee, and Wagenmakers (2009). Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17, 263-269.