| 1. |
- Crüwell, Sophia, et al.
(author)
-
What’s in a Badge? : A Computational Reproducibility Investigation of the Open Data Badge Policy in One Issue of Psychological Science
- 2023
-
In: Psychological Science. - : Sage Publications. - 0956-7976 .- 1467-9280. ; 34:4, s. 512-522
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- In April 2019, Psychological Science published its first issue in which all Research Articles received the Open Data badge.We used that issue to investigate the effectiveness of this badge, focusing on the adherence to its aim at Psychological Science: sharing both data and code to ensure reproducibility of results. Twelve researchers of varying experience levels attempted to reproduce the results of the empirical articles in the target issue (at least three researchers per article). We found that all 14 articles provided at least some data and six provided analysis code, but only one article was rated to be exactly reproducible, and three were rated as essentially reproducible with minor deviations. We suggest that researchers should be encouraged to adhere to the higher standard in force at Psychological Science. Moreover, a check of reproducibility during peer review may be preferable to the disclosure method of awarding badges.
|
|
| 2. |
- Hagger, Martin S., et al.
(author)
-
A Multilab Preregistered Replication of the Ego-Depletion Effect
- 2016
-
In: Perspectives on Psychological Science. - : Sage Publications. - 1745-6916 .- 1745-6924. ; 11:4, s. 546-573
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Good self-control has been linked to adaptive outcomes such as better health, cohesive personal relationships, success in the workplace and at school, and less susceptibility to crime and addictions. In contrast, self-control failure is linked to maladaptive outcomes. Understanding the mechanisms by which self-control predicts behavior may assist in promoting better regulation and outcomes. A popular approach to understanding self-control is the strength or resource depletion model. Self-control is conceptualized as a limited resource that becomes depleted after a period of exertion resulting in self-control failure. The model has typically been tested using a sequential-task experimental paradigm, in which people completing an initial self-control task have reduced self-control capacity and poorer performance on a subsequent task, a state known as ego depletion. Although a meta-analysis of ego-depletion experiments found a medium-sized effect, subsequent meta-analyses have questioned the size and existence of the effect and identified instances of possible bias. The analyses served as a catalyst for the current Registered Replication Report of the ego-depletion effect. Multiple laboratories (k = 23, total N = 2,141) conducted replications of a standardized ego-depletion protocol based on a sequential-task paradigm by Sripada et al. Meta-analysis of the studies revealed that the size of the ego-depletion effect was small with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) that encompassed zero (d = 0.04, 95% CI [-0.07, 0.15]. We discuss implications of the findings for the ego-depletion effect and the resource depletion model of self-control.
|
|
| 3. |
- Van Rooij, Antonius J., et al.
(author)
-
A weak scientific basis for gaming disorder : Let us err on the side of caution
- 2018
-
In: Journal of Behavioral Addictions. - : Akademiai Kiado Zrt.. - 2062-5871 .- 2063-5303. ; 7:1, s. 1-9
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- We greatly appreciate the care and thought that is evident in the 10 commentaries that discuss our debate paper, the majority of which argued in favor of a formalized ICD-11 gaming disorder. We agree that there are some people whose play of video games is related to life problems. We believe that understanding this population and the nature and severity of the problems they experience should be a focus area for future research. However, moving from research construct to formal disorder requires a much stronger evidence base than we currently have. The burden of evidence and the clinical utility should be extremely high, because there is a genuine risk of abuse of diagnoses. We provide suggestions about the level of evidence that might be required: transparent and preregistered studies, a better demarcation of the subject area that includes a rationale for focusing on gaming particularly versus a more general behavioral addictions concept, the exploration of non-addiction approaches, and the unbiased exploration of clinical approaches that treat potentially underlying issues, such as depressive mood or social anxiety first. We acknowledge there could be benefits to formalizing gaming disorder, many of which were highlighted by colleagues in their commentaries, but we think they do not yet outweigh the wider societal and public health risks involved. Given the gravity of diagnostic classification and its wider societal impact, we urge our colleagues at the WHO to err on the side of caution for now and postpone the formalization.
|
|
