Home

Menu

Loading wiki pages...

View
Wiki Version:
<p><strong>Original citation:</strong> Correll, J. (2008). 1/f noise and effort on implicit measures of bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 48-59. </p> <p><strong>Target of replication:</strong> The target finding for replication is the main finding of Study 2 where participants were assigned to one of three conditions: (a) use race during the weapon identification task, (b) avoid race, or (c) control condition where race went unmentioned. Correll found that participants instructed to use race and avoid race exhibited less 1/f noise (as reflected in PSD slopes) than participants in the control condition (planned contrast: average of experimental conditions compared to control condition). For details of our second replication attempt, see <a href="https://osf.io/iraqy/" rel="nofollow">here</a>.</p> <p><strong>A priori replication criterion</strong>: A successful replication would find a statistically significant contrast whereby average of PSD slopes in experimental conditions are less negative than in the control condition.</p> <p><strong>Materials, Data, and Report:</strong> Study materials can be found in the <a href="http://openscienceframework.org/project/fEjxb/node/kGeDj/" rel="nofollow">Materials node</a> of this project. Syntax and data files of the main analyses can be found in the <a href="http://openscienceframework.org/project/fEjxb/node/ZX4ia/" rel="nofollow">data node</a>. The full report is available <a href="https://osf.io/fejxb/osffiles/ReplicationReport_Correll2008_byLeBel_final_fullReport_FINAL.pdf/version/1/download/" rel="nofollow">here</a>.</p> <p><strong>Conclusions:</strong> The current direct replication attempt failed to replicate the original result reported by Correll (2008, Study 2, JPSP). Though the effect was in the expected direction (PSD slopes were numerically less negative in the avoid- and use-race conditions compared to control, presumably reflecting higher effort), the effect – which was about a quarter of the size of the original effect (d = .15 vs. d = .56) -- was not statistically significant at the p &lt; .05 level even though the replication sample size was more than doubled that of the original study and hence had an 86% chance of detecting an effect as large as the one originally reported given it exists.</p>
OSF does not support the use of Internet Explorer. For optimal performance, please switch to another browser.
Accept
This website relies on cookies to help provide a better user experience. By clicking Accept or continuing to use the site, you agree. For more information, see our Privacy Policy and information on cookie use.
Accept
×

Start managing your projects on the OSF today.

Free and easy to use, the Open Science Framework supports the entire research lifecycle: planning, execution, reporting, archiving, and discovery.