Data Colada
Menu
  • Home
  • Table of Contents
  • Feedback Policy
  • About
Menu

Category: Discuss Paper by Others

[119] A Hidden Confound in a Psych Methods Pre‑registrations Critique

Posted on September 2, 2024September 2, 2024 by Uri Simonsohn

A forthcoming paper in Psych Methods (.pdf) had a set of coders evaluate 300 pre-registrations in terms of how informative they were about several study attributes (e.g., hypotheses, analysis, DVs). The authors analyzed the subjective codings and concluded that many pre-registrations in psychology, especially those relying on the AsPredicted template, provide insufficient information., Central to…

Read more

[101] Transparency Makes Research Evaluable: Evaluating a Field Experiment on Crime Published in Nature

Posted on April 28, 2022April 28, 2022 by Joe & Uri

A recently published Nature paper (.htm) examined an interesting psychological hypothesis and applied it to a policy relevant question. The authors ran an ambitious field experiment and posted all their data, code, and materials. They also were transparent in showing the results of many different analyses, including some that yielded non-significant results. This is in…

Read more

[99] Hyping Fisher: The Most Cited 2019 QJE Paper Relied on an Outdated Stata Default to Conclude Regression p-values Are Inadequate

Posted on October 13, 2021October 27, 2021 by Uri Simonsohn

The paper titled “Channeling Fisher: Randomization Tests and the Statistical Insignificance of Seemingly Significant Experimental Results” (.htm) is currently the most cited 2019 article in the Quarterly Journal of Economics (372 Google cites). It delivers bad news to economists running experiments: their p-values are wrong. To get correct p-values, the article explains, they need to…

Read more

[98] Evidence of Fraud in an Influential Field Experiment About Dishonesty

Posted on August 17, 2021April 23, 2022 by Uri, Joe, & Leif

This post is co-authored with a team of researchers who have chosen to remain anonymous. They uncovered most of the evidence reported in this post. These researchers are not connected in any way to the papers described herein. *** In 2012, Shu, Mazar, Gino, Ariely, and Bazerman published a three-study paper in PNAS (.htm) reporting…

Read more

[97] Data Replicada #10: Does Goal Conflict Affect Time Spent on Work and Leisure?

Posted on May 4, 2021May 4, 2021 by Joe & Leif

In the tenth installment of Data Replicada, we report our attempt to replicate a recently published Journal of Consumer Research (JMR) article entitled, “Goal Conflict Encourages Work and Discourages Leisure” (.htm). The article’s two key hypotheses are right there in the title: People who are faced with a goal conflict are (1) more likely to…

Read more

[96] Madam Speaker: Are Female Presenters Treated Worse in Econ Seminars?

Posted on April 30, 2021April 30, 2021 by Uri Simonsohn

A recent NBER paper titled “Gender and the Dynamics of Economics Seminars” (.htm) reports analyses of audience questions asked during 462 economics seminars, concluding that “women are asked more questions . . . and the questions asked of women are more likely to be patronizing or hostile . . . suggest[ing] yet another potential explanation…

Read more

[94] Data Replicada #9: Are Progression Ads More Credible?

Posted on December 3, 2020December 2, 2020 by Joe & Leif

In the ninth installment of Data Replicada, we report our attempt to replicate a recently published Journal of Marketing Research (JMR) article entitled, “Advertising a Desired Change: When Process Simulation Fosters (vs. Hinders) Credibility and Persuasion” (.htm). Some products, such as weight loss programs, exist to help consumers attain a desired change. In this paper,…

Read more

[92] Data Replicada #8: Is The Left-Digit Bias Stronger When Prices Are Presented Side-By-Side?

Posted on October 1, 2020October 1, 2020 by Joe & Leif

In the eighth installment of Data Replicada, we report our attempt to replicate a recently published Journal of Marketing Research (JMR) article entitled, “The Left-Digit Bias: When and Why Are Consumers Penny Wise and Pound Foolish?” (.htm). In this paper, the authors offer insight into a previously documented observation known as the left-digit bias, whereby…

Read more

[90] Data Replicada #7: Does Displaying Multiple Copies of a Product Increase Its Perceived Effectiveness?

Posted on August 18, 2020August 14, 2020 by Joe & Leif

In the seventh installment of Data Replicada, we report our attempt to replicate a recently published Journal of Consumer Research (JCR) article entitled, “Product Entitativity: How the Presence of Product Replicates Increases Perceived and Actual Product Efficacy” (.html). In this paper, the authors propose that “presenting multiple product replicates as a group (vs. presenting a…

Read more

[89] Data Replicada #6: The Problem of (Weird) Differential Attrition

Posted on July 21, 2020July 22, 2020 by Joe & Leif

In this sixth installment of Data Replicada, we report our attempt to replicate a recently published Journal of Consumer Research (JCR) article entitled, “The Impact of Resource Scarcity on Price-Quality Judgments” (.html). This one was full of surprises. The primary thesis of this article is straightforward: “Scarcity decreases consumers’ tendency to use price to judge…

Read more
  • Previous
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • Next

Get Colada email alerts.

Join 11.1K other subscribers

Social media

Bluesky X Substack

Recent Posts

  • [139] Artificial Deadlines (Part 2):
    Retrograding Ariely & Wertenbroch (2002)
  • [138] Artificial Deadlines (Part 1): Evidence of Fraud in an Influential Study About Procrastination
  • [137] OSF Will Stop Accepting Your Research Files, You Can Use ResearchBox Instead
  • [136] Metadata Falsificada: The Cover-Up File in
    Gino v. Harvard
  • [134] Figuring Out Figure 1

Get blogpost email alerts

Join 11.1K other subscribers

tweeter & facebook

We announce posts on Twitter
We announce posts on Bluesky
And link to them on our Facebook page

Posts on similar topics

Discuss Paper by Others
  • [139] Artificial Deadlines (Part 2):
    Retrograding Ariely & Wertenbroch (2002)
  • [138] Artificial Deadlines (Part 1): Evidence of Fraud in an Influential Study About Procrastination
  • [134] Figuring Out Figure 1
  • [131] Bending Over Backwards:
    The Quadratic Puts the U in AI
  • [128] LinkedOut: The Best Published Audit Study, And Its Interesting Shortcoming
  • [127] Meaningless Means #4: Correcting Scientific Misinformation
  • [125] “Complexity” 2: Don’t be mean to the median
  • [124] “Complexity”: 75% of participants missed comprehension questions in AER paper critiquing Prospect Theory
  • [122] Arresting Flexibility: A QJE field experiment on police behavior with about 40 outcome variables
  • [121] Dear Political Scientists: Don’t Bin, GAM Instead

search

© 2021, Uri Simonsohn, Leif Nelson, and Joseph Simmons. For permission to reprint individual blog posts on DataColada please contact us via email..