| 1. |
- Buchanan, E. M., et al.
(författare)
-
The Psychological Science Accelerator's COVID-19 rapid-response dataset
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Scientific Data. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 2052-4463. ; 10:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Psychological Science Accelerator coordinated three large-scale psychological studies to examine the effects of loss-gain framing, cognitive reappraisals, and autonomy framing manipulations on behavioral intentions and affective measures. The data collected (April to October 2020) included specific measures for each experimental study, a general questionnaire examining health prevention behaviors and COVID-19 experience, geographical and cultural context characterization, and demographic information for each participant. Each participant started the study with the same general questions and then was randomized to complete either one longer experiment or two shorter experiments. Data were provided by 73,223 participants with varying completion rates. Participants completed the survey from 111 geopolitical regions in 44 unique languages/dialects. The anonymized dataset described here is provided in both raw and processed formats to facilitate re-use and further analyses. The dataset offers secondary analytic opportunities to explore coping, framing, and self-determination across a diverse, global sample obtained at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, which can be merged with other time-sampled or geographic data.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Jones, Benedict C, et al.
(författare)
-
To which world regions does the valence-dominance model of social perception apply?
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Nature Human Behaviour. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 2397-3374. ; 5:1, s. 159-169
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Over the past 10 years, Oosterhof and Todorov's valence-dominance model has emerged as the most prominent account of how people evaluate faces on social dimensions. In this model, two dimensions (valence and dominance) underpin social judgements of faces. Because this model has primarily been developed and tested in Western regions, it is unclear whether these findings apply to other regions. We addressed this question by replicating Oosterhof and Todorov's methodology across 11 world regions, 41 countries and 11,570 participants. When we used Oosterhof and Todorov's original analysis strategy, the valence-dominance model generalized across regions. When we used an alternative methodology to allow for correlated dimensions, we observed much less generalization. Collectively, these results suggest that, while the valence-dominance model generalizes very well across regions when dimensions are forced to be orthogonal, regional differences are revealed when we use different extraction methods and correlate and rotate the dimension reduction solution. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: The stage 1 protocol for this Registered Report was accepted in principle on 5 November 2018. The protocol, as accepted by the journal, can be found at https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.7611443.v1 .
|
|
| 6. |
- Menkveld, Albert J., et al.
(författare)
-
Nonstandard Errors
- 2024
-
Ingår i: JOURNAL OF FINANCE. - : Wiley-Blackwell. - 0022-1082 .- 1540-6261. ; 79:3, s. 2339-2390
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- In statistics, samples are drawn from a population in a data-generating process (DGP). Standard errors measure the uncertainty in estimates of population parameters. In science, evidence is generated to test hypotheses in an evidence-generating process (EGP). We claim that EGP variation across researchers adds uncertainty-nonstandard errors (NSEs). We study NSEs by letting 164 teams test the same hypotheses on the same data. NSEs turn out to be sizable, but smaller for more reproducible or higher rated research. Adding peer-review stages reduces NSEs. We further find that this type of uncertainty is underestimated by participants.
|
|
| 7. |
- Ebersole, Charles R., et al.
(författare)
-
Many Labs 5: Testing Pre-Data-Collection Peer Review as an Intervention to Increase Replicability
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science. - : Sage. - 2515-2467 .- 2515-2459. ; 3:3, s. 309-331
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Replication studies in psychological science sometimes fail to reproduce prior findings. If these studies use methods that are unfaithful to the original study or ineffective in eliciting the phenomenon of interest, then a failure to replicate may be a failure of the protocol rather than a challenge to the original finding. Formal pre-data-collection peer review by experts may address shortcomings and increase replicability rates. We selected 10 replication studies from the Reproducibility Project: Psychology (RP:P; Open Science Collaboration, 2015) for which the original authors had expressed concerns about the replication designs before data collection; only one of these studies had yielded a statistically significant effect (p < .05). Commenters suggested that lack of adherence to expert review and low-powered tests were the reasons that most of these RP:P studies failed to replicate the original effects. We revised the replication protocols and received formal peer review prior to conducting new replication studies. We administered the RP:P and revised protocols in multiple laboratories (median number of laboratories per original study = 6.5, range = 3-9; median total sample = 1,279.5, range = 276-3,512) for high-powered tests of each original finding with both protocols. Overall, following the preregistered analysis plan, we found that the revised protocols produced effect sizes similar to those of the RP:P protocols (Delta r = .002 or .014, depending on analytic approach). The median effect size for the revised protocols (r = .05) was similar to that of the RP:P protocols (r = .04) and the original RP:P replications (r = .11), and smaller than that of the original studies (r = .37). Analysis of the cumulative evidence across the original studies and the corresponding three replication attempts provided very precise estimates of the 10 tested effects and indicated that their effect sizes (median r = .07, range = .00-.15) were 78% smaller, on average, than the original effect sizes (median r = .37, range = .19-.50).
|
|
| 8. |
- Sanabria-Mazo, Juan P., et al.
(författare)
-
Efficacy, cost-utility and physiological effects of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) and Behavioural Activation Treatment for Depression (BATD) in patients with chronic low back pain and depression : study protocol of a randomised, controlled trial including mobile-technology-based ecological momentary assessment (IMPACT study)
- 2020
-
Ingår i: BMJ Open. - : BMJ. - 2044-6055. ; 10:7
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Introduction The IMPACT study focuses on chronic low back pain (CLBP) and depression symptoms, a prevalent and complex problem that represents a challenge for health professionals. Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) and Brief Behavioural Activation Treatment for Depression (BATD) are effective treatments for patients with persistent pain and depression, respectively. The objectives of this 12 month, multicentre, randomised, controlled trial (RCT) are (i) to examine the efficacy and cost-utility of adding a group-based form of ACT or BATD to treatment-as-usual (TAU) for patients with CLBP and moderate to severe levels of depressive symptoms; (ii) identify pre-post differences in levels of some physiological variables and (iii) analyse the role of polymorphisms in theFKBP5gene, psychological process measures and physiological variables as mediators or moderators of long-term clinical changes. Methods and analysis Participants will be 225 patients with CLBP and moderate to severe depression symptoms recruited at Parc Sanitari Sant Joan de Deu (St. Boi de Llobregat, Spain) and Hospital del Mar (Barcelona, Spain), randomly allocated to one of the three study arms: TAU vs TAU+ACT versus TAU+BATD. A comprehensive assessment to collect clinical variables and costs will be conducted pretreatment, post-treatment and at 12 months follow-up, being pain interference the primary outcome measure. The following physiological variables will be considered at pretreatment and post-treatment assessments in 50% of the sample: immune-inflammatory markers, hair cortisol and cortisone, serum cortisol, corticosteroid-binding globulin and vitamin D. Polymorphisms in theFKBP5gene (rs3800373, rs9296158, rs1360780, rs9470080 and rs4713916) will be analysed at baseline assessment. Moreover, we will include mobile-technology-based ecological momentary assessment, through the Pain Monitor app, to track ongoing clinical status during ACT and BATD treatments. Linear mixed-effects models using restricted maximum likelihood, and a full economic evaluation applying bootstrapping techniques, acceptability curves and sensitivity analyses will be computed. Ethics and dissemination This study has been approved by the Ethics Committee of the Fundacio Sant Joan de Deu and Hospital del Mar. The results will be actively disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, conference presentations, social media and various community engagement activities.
|
|
