Reply to Inbar: Contextual sensitivity helps explain the reproducibility gap between social and cognitive psychology

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America

Volumn 113, Issue 34, 2016, Pages E4935-E4936

  Van Bavel, Jay J ^a   Mende Siedlecki, Peter ^a   Brady, William J ^a   Reinero, Diego A ^a  

^a NEW YORK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CONTEXTUAL SENSITIVITY; EFFECT SIZE; HUMAN; LETTER; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCHOLOGIST; REPRODUCIBILITY; SAMPLE SIZE; SOCIAL COGNITION; SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT; SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY; STATISTICAL PARAMETERS; COGNITION;

COGNITION; HUMANS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 84983360271     PISSN: 00278424     EISSN: 10916490     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1609700113     Document Type: Letter

References (6)

1. Van Bavel JJ, Mende-Siedlecki P, Brady WJ, Reinero DA (2016) Contextual sensitivity in scientific reproducibility. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 113(23):6454-6459.
2. Inbar Y (2016) Association between contextual dependence and replicability in psychology may be spurious. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 113:E4933-E4934.
3. Open Science Collaboration (2015) PSYCHOLOGY. Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science 349(6251):aac4716.
4. Cohen J, Cohen P, West SG, Aiken LS (2013) Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (Routledge, New York).
5. Fiske ST, Taylor SE (2013) Social Cognition: From Brains to Culture (Sage, London), 2nd Ed.
6. Lewin K (1936) Principles of Topological Psychology (McGraw-Hill, New York) trans Heider F and Heider G.