Registered Replication Report on Srull and Wyer (1979). Issue 3 (September 2018)
- Record Type:
- Journal Article
- Title:
- Registered Replication Report on Srull and Wyer (1979). Issue 3 (September 2018)
- Main Title:
- Registered Replication Report on Srull and Wyer (1979)
- Authors:
- McCarthy, Randy J.
Skowronski, John J.
Verschuere, Bruno
Meijer, Ewout H.
Jim, Ariane
Hoogesteyn, Katherine
Orthey, Robin
Acar, Oguz A.
Aczel, Balazs
Bakos, Bence E.
Barbosa, Fernando
Baskin, Ernest
Bègue, Laurent
Ben-Shakhar, Gershon
Birt, Angie R.
Blatz, Lisa
Charman, Steve D.
Claesen, Aline
Clay, Samuel L.
Coary, Sean P.
Crusius, Jan
Evans, Jacqueline R.
Feldman, Noa
Ferreira-Santos, Fernando
Gamer, Matthias
Gerlsma, Coby
Gomes, Sara
González-Iraizoz, Marta
Holzmeister, Felix
Huber, Juergen
Huntjens, Rafaele J. C.
Isoni, Andrea
Jessup, Ryan K.
Kirchler, Michael
klein Selle, Nathalie
Koppel, Lina
Kovacs, Marton
Laine, Tei
Lentz, Frank
Loschelder, David D.
Ludvig, Elliot A.
Lynn, Monty L.
Martin, Scott D.
McLatchie, Neil M.
Mechtel, Mario
Nahari, Galit
Özdoğru, Asil Ali
Pasion, Rita
Pennington, Charlotte R.
Roets, Arne
Rozmann, Nir
Scopelliti, Irene
Spiegelman, Eli
Suchotzki, Kristina
Sutan, Angela
Szecsi, Peter
Tinghög, Gustav
Tisserand, Jean-Christian
Tran, Ulrich S.
Van Hiel, Alain
Vanpaemel, Wolf
Västfjäll, Daniel
Verliefde, Thomas
Vezirian, Kévin
Voracek, Martin
Warmelink, Lara
Wick, Katherine
Wiggins, Bradford J.
Wylie, Keith
Yıldız, Ezgi
… (more) - Abstract:
- Srull and Wyer (1979) demonstrated that exposing participants to more hostility-related stimuli caused them subsequently to interpret ambiguous behaviors as more hostile. In their Experiment 1, participants descrambled sets of words to form sentences. In one condition, 80% of the descrambled sentences described hostile behaviors, and in another condition, 20% described hostile behaviors. Following the descrambling task, all participants read a vignette about a man named Donald who behaved in an ambiguously hostile manner and then rated him on a set of personality traits. Next, participants rated the hostility of various ambiguously hostile behaviors (all ratings on scales from 0 to 10). Participants who descrambled mostly hostile sentences rated Donald and the ambiguous behaviors as approximately 3 scale points more hostile than did those who descrambled mostly neutral sentences. This Registered Replication Report describes the results of 26 independent replications ( N = 7, 373 in the total sample; k = 22 labs and N = 5, 610 in the primary analyses) of Srull and Wyer's Experiment 1, each of which followed a preregistered and vetted protocol. A random-effects meta-analysis showed that the protagonist was seen as 0.08 scale points more hostile when participants were primed with 80% hostile sentences than when they were primed with 20% hostile sentences (95% confidence interval, CI = [0.004, 0.16]). The ambiguously hostile behaviors were seen as 0.08 points less hostile whenSrull and Wyer (1979) demonstrated that exposing participants to more hostility-related stimuli caused them subsequently to interpret ambiguous behaviors as more hostile. In their Experiment 1, participants descrambled sets of words to form sentences. In one condition, 80% of the descrambled sentences described hostile behaviors, and in another condition, 20% described hostile behaviors. Following the descrambling task, all participants read a vignette about a man named Donald who behaved in an ambiguously hostile manner and then rated him on a set of personality traits. Next, participants rated the hostility of various ambiguously hostile behaviors (all ratings on scales from 0 to 10). Participants who descrambled mostly hostile sentences rated Donald and the ambiguous behaviors as approximately 3 scale points more hostile than did those who descrambled mostly neutral sentences. This Registered Replication Report describes the results of 26 independent replications ( N = 7, 373 in the total sample; k = 22 labs and N = 5, 610 in the primary analyses) of Srull and Wyer's Experiment 1, each of which followed a preregistered and vetted protocol. A random-effects meta-analysis showed that the protagonist was seen as 0.08 scale points more hostile when participants were primed with 80% hostile sentences than when they were primed with 20% hostile sentences (95% confidence interval, CI = [0.004, 0.16]). The ambiguously hostile behaviors were seen as 0.08 points less hostile when participants were primed with 80% hostile sentences than when they were primed with 20% hostile sentences (95% CI = [−0.18, 0.01]). Although the confidence interval for one outcome excluded zero and the observed effect was in the predicted direction, these results suggest that the currently used methods do not produce an assimilative priming effect that is practically and routinely detectable. … (more)
- Is Part Of:
- Advances in methods and practices in psychological science. Volume 1:Issue 3(2018)
- Journal:
- Advances in methods and practices in psychological science
- Issue:
- Volume 1:Issue 3(2018)
- Issue Display:
- Volume 1, Issue 3 (2018)
- Year:
- 2018
- Volume:
- 1
- Issue:
- 3
- Issue Sort Value:
- 2018-0001-0003-0000
- Page Start:
- 321
- Page End:
- 336
- Publication Date:
- 2018-09
- Subjects:
- hostility -- priming -- impression formation -- replication -- Many Labs -- open data -- open materials -- preregistered
Psychology -- Periodicals
Psychology -- Research -- Periodicals
150 - Journal URLs:
- http://journals.sagepub.com/loi/ampa ↗
http://www.sagepublications.com/ ↗ - DOI:
- 10.1177/2515245918777487 ↗
- Languages:
- English
- ISSNs:
- 2515-2459
- Deposit Type:
- Legaldeposit
- View Content:
- Available online (eLD content is only available in our Reading Rooms) ↗
- Physical Locations:
- British Library DSC - BLDSS-3PM
British Library HMNTS - ELD Digital store - Ingest File:
- 8689.xml