Introduction to the Special Issue on Methodological Rigor and Replicability

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

Volumn 66, Issue , 2016, Pages 1-3

  Stangor, Charles ^a   Lemay, Edward P ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84977119456     PISSN: 00221031     EISSN: 10960465     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2016.02.006     Document Type: Editorial

References (39)

1. Anderson, N.H., Averaging versus adding as a stimulus-combination rule in impression formation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 70(4), 1965, 394.
2. Asendorpf, J.B., Conner, M., De Fruyt, F., De Houwer, J., Denissen, J.J., Fiedler, K. Nosek, B.A., Recommendations for increasing replicability in psychology. European Journal of Personality 27:2 (2013), 108–119.
3. Baumeister, R., Charting the Future of Social Psychology on Stormy Seas: Winners, Losers, and Recommendations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 66 (2016), 153–158 (in this issue).
4. Begley, C.G., Ellis, L.M., Drug development: Raise standards for preclinical cancer research. Nature 483:7391 (2012), 531–533.
5. Berinsky, A., Can we turn shirkers into workers?. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 66 (2016), 20–28 (in this issue).
6. Button, K.S., Ioannidis, J.P.A., Mokrysz, C., Nosek, B.A., Flint, J., Robinson, E.S.J., Munafò, M.R., Power failure: Why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 14:5 (2013), 365–376, 10.1038/nrn3475.
7. Cialdini, R.B., Full-cycle social psychology. Bickman, L., (eds.) Applied social psychology annual, Vol. 1, 1980, Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, CA, 21–47.
8. Crandall, C.S., Sherman, J.W., On the Scientific Superiority of Conceptual Replications. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 66 (2016), 93–99 (in this issue).
9. Curran, P.G., Methods for the detection of carelessly invalid responses in survey data. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 66 (2016), 4–19 (in this issue).
10. Dovidio, J.A., Commentary: A big problem requires a foundational change. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 66 (2016), 159–165 (in this issue).
11. Fabrigar, L.R., Wegener, D.T., Conceptualizing and evaluating the replication of research results. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 66 (2016), 68–80 (in this issue).
12. Finkel, E.J., Eastwick, P.W., Reis, H.T., Best research practices in psychology: Illustrating epistemological and pragmatic considerations with the case of relationship science. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 108:2 (2015), 275–297, 10.1037/pspi0000007.
13. Fiske, S.T., How to Publish Rigorous Experiments in the 21st Century. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 66 (2016), 145–147 (in this issue).
14. Gergen, K.J., Social psychology as history. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 26 (1973), 209–320, 10.1037/h0034436.
15. Giner-Sorolla, R., Science or art? How aesthetic standards grease the way through the publication bottleneck but undermine science. Perspectives on Psychological Science 7 (2012), 562–571.
16. Hales, A., Does the conclusion follow from the evidence? Recommendations for improving research. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 66 (2016), 39–46 (in this issue).
17. Head, M.L., Holman, L., Lanfear, R., Kahn, A.T., Jennions, M.D., The extent and consequences of P-hacking in science. PLoS Biology, 13(3), 2015, e1002106.
18. Hüffmeier, J., Reconceptualizing replication as a sequence of different studies: A replication typology. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 66 (2016), 81–92 (in this issue).
19. John, L.K., Loewenstein, G., Prelec, D., Measuring the prevalence of questionable research practices with incentives for truth telling. Psychological Science 23:5 (2012), 524–532.
20. Jussim, L., Crawford, J.T., Duarte, J., Anglin, S.M., Stevens, S.T., Interpretations and methods: Towards a more effectively self-correcting social psychology. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 66 (2016), 116–133 (in this issue).
21. Ledgerwood, A., Introduction to the special section on moving toward a cumulative science maximizing what our research can tell us. Perspectives on Psychological Science 9:6 (2014), 610–611, 10.1177/1745691614553989.
22. Ledgerwood, A., Sherman, J.W., Short, sweet, and problematic? The rise of the short report in psychological science. Perspectives on Psychological Science 7:1 (2012), 60–66.
23. Maner, J.K., Let's put our money where our mouth is if authors are to change their ways, reviewers (and editors) must change with them. Perspectives on Psychological Science 9:3 (2014), 343–351.
24. Maner, J.K., Into the wild: Field research can increase both replicability and real-world impact. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 66 (2016), 100–106 (in this issue).
25. McClelland, G.H., Judd, C.M., Statistical difficulties of detecting interactions and moderator effects. Psychological Bulletin 114:2 (1993), 376–390.
26. McGuire, W.J., The yin and yang of progress in social psychology: Seven koan. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 26 (1973), 446–456, 10.1037/h0034345.
27. Open Science Collaboration (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349, #6251. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.aac4716.
28. Pirlott, A.G., MacKinnon, D.P., Design approaches to experimental mediation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 66 (2016), 29–38 (in this issue).
29. Richard, F.D., Bond, C.F. Jr., Stokes-Zooka, J.J., One hundred years of social psychology quantitatively described. Review of General Psychology 7:4 (2003), 331–363.
30. Sagarin, B.J., Ambler, J.K., Lee, E.M., An ethical approach to peeking at data. Perspectives on Psychological Science 9:3 (2014), 293–304.
31. Sakaluk, J.K., Exploring small, confirming big: An alternative system to the new statistics for advancing cumulative and replicable psychological research. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 66 (2016), 47–54 (in this issue).
32. Sakaluk, J., Williams, A., Biernat, M., Analytic review as a solution to the misreporting of statistical results in psychological science. Perspectives on Psychological Science 9:6 (2014), 652–660.
33. Schaller, M., The empirical benefits of conceptual rigor: Systematic articulation of conceptual hypotheses can reduce the risk of non-replicable results (and facilitate novel discoveries too. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 66 (2016), 107–115 (in this issue).
34. Schooler, J., Unpublished results hide the decline effect. Nature News, 470(7335), 2011, 437, 10.1038/470437a.
35. Sigall, H., Mills, J., Measures of independent variables and mediators are useful in social psychology experiments: But are they necessary?. Personality and Social Psychology Review 2:3 (1998), 218–226, 10.1207/s15327957pspr0203_5.
36. Simmons, J.P., Nelson, L.D., Simonsohn, U., False-positive psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant. Psychological Science 22:11 (2011), 1359–1366.
37. Simonsohn, U., Just post it the lesson from two cases of fabricated data detected by statistics alone. Psychological Science, 2013 (0,956,797,613,480,366).
38. Stroebe, W., Are most published social psychological findings false?. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 66 (2016), 134–144 (in this issue).
39. Schweinsberg, M., Madan, N., Vianello, M., Sommer, S.A., Jordan, J., Tierney, W. Uhlmann, E.L., The pipeline project: Pre-publication independent replications of a single laboratory's research pipeline. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 66 (2016), 55–67 (in this issue).