<p><strong>Many Labs 1: Access the <a href="https://osf.io/9fs5i/" rel="nofollow">full-size figure</a>, <a href="https://osf.io/pqf9r/" rel="nofollow">data</a>, <a href="https://osf.io/abesq/" rel="nofollow">preregistered protocol</a>, and <a href="https://osf.io/ebmf8/" rel="nofollow">final manuscript</a> in <a href="https://openscienceframework.org/project/WX7Ck/files/" rel="nofollow">files</a>.</strong><br> </p>
<p>Notes:<br>
<strong>Erratum</strong> correcting the effect size for allowed/forbidden (among other issues) is <a href="https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2019-34530-002" rel="nofollow">published here</a>.<br>
<strong>Updated stats</strong> for <a href="https://osf.io/y36m8/" rel="nofollow">ML.web.Supplement.pdf</a> made on 10/19/2017 fixing incorrect numbers for Anchoring and Adjustment. Thanks to Uri Simonsohn for discovering these errors.</p>
<p><img src="https://osf.io/9fs5i/download"></p>
<p>Notes: “X” indicates the effect sizes obtained in the original studies. Large circles represent the aggregate effect sizes obtained across all participants. Error bars represent 99% noncentral confidence intervals around the effects. Small circles represent the effect sizes obtained within each site (grey and green circles for US and international replications, respectively). </p>
<p><strong>Links to original articles that provide the studies for this replication effort:</strong></p>
<p><a href="http://peoplescience.org/sites/default/files/OppenheimerMeyvisDavidenko.2009.pdf" rel="nofollow">Instructional manipulation checks: Detecting satisficing to increase statistical power</a> (Oppenheimer et al., 2009)</p>
<p><a href="http://psych.hanover.edu/classes/cognition/papers/tversky81.pdf" rel="nofollow">The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice</a> (Tversky & Kahneman, 1981)</p>
<p><a href="http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1996-24980-001" rel="nofollow">Measures of anchoring in estimation tasks</a> (Jacowitz & Kahneman, 1995)</p>
<p><a href="http://journal.sjdm.org/9609/jdm9609.pdf" rel="nofollow">The retrospective gambler’s fallacy: Unlikely events, constructing the past, and multiple universes</a> (Oppenheimer & Monin, 2009)</p>
<p><a href="http://connection.ebscohost.com/c/articles/5414342/response-scales-effects-category-range-reported-behavior-comparative-judgments" rel="nofollow">Response scales: Effects of category range on reported behavior and comparative judgments</a> (Schwarz et al., 1985)</p>
<p>The current status of American public opinion (Hyman & Sheatsley, 1950)</p>
<p><a href="https://pantherfile.uwm.edu/suelima/labreport1/rugg1941.pdf" rel="nofollow">Experiments in wording questions: II</a> (Rugg, 1941)</p>
<p><a href="http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1937-04240-001" rel="nofollow">Prestige, suggestion, and attitudes</a> (Lorge & Curtiss, 1936)</p>
<p><a href="http://pss.sagepub.com/content/early/2011/07/08/0956797611414726" rel="nofollow">A single exposure to the American flag shifts support toward Republicanism up to 8 months later</a> (Carter et al., 2011; Study 2)</p>
<p><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22774789" rel="nofollow">Mere exposure to money increases endorsement of free-market systems and social inequality</a> (Caruso et al., 2012)</p>
<p><a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022103110001307" rel="nofollow">Elaboration enhances the imagined contact effect</a> (Husnu & Crisp, 2010, Study 1)</p>
<p><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12088131" rel="nofollow">Math = Male, Me = Female, therefore Math ≠ Me</a> (Nosek, Banaji, & Greenwald, 2002)</p>
