» Articles » PMID: 28936638

Examining Reproducibility in Psychology: A Hybrid Method for Combining a Statistically Significant Original Study and a Replication

Overview
Publisher Springer
Specialty Social Sciences
Date 2017 Sep 23
PMID 28936638
Citations 6
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The unrealistically high rate of positive results within psychology has increased the attention to replication research. However, researchers who conduct a replication and want to statistically combine the results of their replication with a statistically significant original study encounter problems when using traditional meta-analysis techniques. The original study's effect size is most probably overestimated because it is statistically significant, and this bias is not taken into consideration in traditional meta-analysis. We have developed a hybrid method that does take the statistical significance of an original study into account and enables (a) accurate effect size estimation, (b) estimation of a confidence interval, and (c) testing of the null hypothesis of no effect. We analytically approximate the performance of the hybrid method and describe its statistical properties. By applying the hybrid method to data from the Reproducibility Project: Psychology (Open Science Collaboration, 2015), we demonstrate that the conclusions based on the hybrid method are often in line with those of the replication, suggesting that many published psychological studies have smaller effect sizes than those reported in the original study, and that some effects may even be absent. We offer hands-on guidelines for how to statistically combine an original study and replication, and have developed a Web-based application ( https://rvanaert.shinyapps.io/hybrid ) for applying the hybrid method.

Citing Articles

Is Psychological Science Self-Correcting? Citations Before and After Successful and Failed Replications.

von Hippel P Perspect Psychol Sci. 2022; 17(6):1556-1565.

PMID: 35713980 PMC: 10460510. DOI: 10.1177/17456916211072525.


CAS: corpus of clinical cases in French.

Grabar N, Dalloux C, Claveau V J Biomed Semantics. 2020; 11(1):7.

PMID: 32762729 PMC: 7410149. DOI: 10.1186/s13326-020-00225-x.


Replicable brain signatures of emotional bias and memory based on diffusion kurtosis imaging of white matter tracts.

Welton T, Indja B, Maller J, Fanning J, Vallely M, Grieve S Hum Brain Mapp. 2019; 41(5):1274-1285.

PMID: 31773802 PMC: 7268065. DOI: 10.1002/hbm.24874.


Divergence of an association between depressive symptoms and a dopamine polygenic score in Caucasians and Asians.

Avinun R, Nevo A, Radtke S, Brigidi B, Hariri A Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2019; 270(2):229-235.

PMID: 31289926 DOI: 10.1007/s00406-019-01040-x.


Publication bias examined in meta-analyses from psychology and medicine: A meta-meta-analysis.

van Aert R, Wicherts J, van Assen M PLoS One. 2019; 14(4):e0215052.

PMID: 30978228 PMC: 6461282. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0215052.


References
1.
Gilbert D, King G, Pettigrew S, Wilson T . Comment on "Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science". Science. 2016; 351(6277):1037. DOI: 10.1126/science.aad7243. View

2.
Exline J, Baumeister R, Zell A, Kraft A, Witvliet C . Not so innocent: does seeing one's own capacity for wrongdoing predict forgiveness?. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2008; 94(3):495-515. DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.94.3.495. View

3.
Janiszewski C, Uy D . Precision of the anchor influences the amount of adjustment. Psychol Sci. 2008; 19(2):121-7. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02057.x. View

4.
Ersner-Hershfield H, Mikels J, Sullivan S, Carstensen L . Poignancy: mixed emotional experience in the face of meaningful endings. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2008; 94(1):158-67. PMC: 2807633. DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.94.1.158. View

5.
Turk-Browne N, Isola P, Scholl B, Treat T . Multidimensional visual statistical learning. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2008; 34(2):399-407. DOI: 10.1037/0278-7393.34.2.399. View