Statistical heartburn: An attempt to digest four pizza publications from the Cornell Food and Brand Lab

BMC Nutrition

Volumn 3, Issue 1, 2017, Pages

  Van Der Zee, Tim ^a   Anaya, Jordan ^b   Brown, Nicholas J L ^c  

^a LEIDEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^b Omnes Res   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER GRONINGEN   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Reanalysis; Replication; Reproducibility; Statistics

Indexed keywords

EID: 85041815256     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20550928     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/s40795-017-0167-x     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Ioannidis JPA. Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Med. 2005; 2(8):e124.
2. Open Science Collaboration. Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science. 2015; 349(6251):aac4716.
3. Schwarz N, Clore GL. Evaluating psychological research requires more than attention to the N: A comment on Simonsohn's (2015) "small telescopes". Psychol Sci. 2016; 27(10):1407-9.
4. John LK, Loewenstein G, Prelec D. Measuring the prevalence of questionable research practices with incentives for truth telling. Psychol Sci. 2012; 23(5):524-32.
5. Bakker M, van Dijk A, Wicherts JM. The rules of the game called psychological Science. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2012; 7(6):543-54.
6. Smaldino PE, McElreath R. The natural selection of bad science. R Soc Open Sci. 2016; 3(9):160384.
7. Bakker M, Wicherts JM. The (mis)reporting of statistical results in psychology journals. Behav Res Methods. 2011; 43(3):666-78.
8. Nuijten MB, Hartgerink CHJ, Assen MALM, Epskamp S, Wicherts JM. The prevalence of statistical reporting errors in psychology (1985-2013). Behav Res Methods. 2015;1-22.
9. Brown NJL, Heathers JAJ. The GRIM test: A simple technique detects numerous anomalies in the reporting of results in psychology. Soc Psychol Personal Sci. 2016; Advance online publication:1-7.
10. Wansink B. The Grad Student Who Never Said "No". Healthier & Happier. 2016. https://web-beta.archive.org/web/20170312041524/ http://www.brianwansink.com/phd-advice/the-grad-student-who-never-said-noAccessed. Accessed 24 June 2017.
11. Just DR, Sigirci Ö, Wansink B. Lower buffet prices lead to less taste satisfaction. J Sens Stud. 2014; 29(5):362-70.
12. Just DR, Sigirci Ö, Wansink B. Peak-end pizza: prices delay evaluations of quality. J Prod Brand Manag. 2015; 24(7):770-8.
13. Sigirci Ö, Wansink B. Low prices and high regret: How pricing influences regret at all-you-can-eat buffets. BMC Nutr. 2015; 1(1):36.
14. Kniffin KM, Sigirci Ö, Wansink B. Eating Heavily: Men Eat More in the Company of Women. Evol Psychol Sci. 2016; 2(1):38-46.
15. Kirkman BL, Chen G. Maximizing your data or data slicing? Recommendations for managing multiple submissions from the same dataset. Manag Organ Rev. 2011; 7(3):433-46.
16. BMC. BMC Editorial Policies. BioMed Central; 2017. https://www.biomedcentral.com/getpublished/editorial-policies. Accessed 24 June 2017.
17. Anaya J. The GRIMMER test: A method for testing the validity of reported measures of variability. PeerJ Preprints. 2016; 4:e2400v1.
18. Epskamp S, Nuijten MB. Statcheck: Extract statistics from articles and recompute p values (R package version 1.0.1). 2015.
19. R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna; 2016. Available from: https://www.R-project.org/.
20. Elson M, Przybylski AK. The Science of Technology and Human Behavior: Standards, Old and New: In press.
21. GraphPad. Quickcalcs. 2017. Available at http://www.graphpad.com/quickcalcs/.
22. Stangroom J. Social Science Statistics. 2017. Available at http://www.socscistatistics.com/tests.
23. StatTrek. StatTrek. 2017. Available at http://www.stattrek.com.