Suppr超能文献

帕内罗等人(2016 年):未能复制方法导致未能复制结果。

Panero et al. (2016): Failure to replicate methods caused the failure to replicate results.

机构信息

Department of Psychology, The New School for Social Research.

出版信息

J Pers Soc Psychol. 2017 Mar;112(3):e1-e4. doi: 10.1037/pspa0000072.

Abstract

Contrary to Kidd and Castano (2013), Panero et al. (2016) fail to find that reading literary fiction improves performance on an advanced test of theory of mind (ToM), the Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test. However, this commentary shows that the findings presented in Panero et al. (2016) are not reliable due to two striking threats to the internal validity of their studies that were not clearly disclosed or discussed in the manuscript or supplementary materials. First, no effective strategy was implemented to ensure that participants read their assigned texts, and examination of the data revealed many participants whose reading times indicate that they were not exposed to the manipulation. Second, further examination shows that two of the largest studies contributing to Panero et al. (2016) are not valid experiments due to a clear failure of random assignment to conditions. These threats to experimental internal validity make the conclusions presented in Panero et al. (2016) untenable. After removing cases in which participants were not exposed to the manipulation and the data from the two studies without random assignment, an analysis reveals that reading literary fiction improves ToM compared to reading popular genre fiction. This result is consistent with prior studies and indicates that a failure to carefully replicate the methods of Kidd and Castano (2013) led to the failure to replicate Kidd and Castano's (2013) results. (PsycINFO Database Record

摘要

与 Kidd 和 Castano(2013)相反,Panero 等人(2016)未能发现阅读文学小说能提高心理理论(ToM)的高级测试——“读心测试”的表现。然而,这篇评论表明,由于 Panero 等人(2016)研究的内部有效性存在两个明显的威胁,而这些威胁在论文或补充材料中没有明确披露或讨论,因此他们呈现的发现是不可靠的。首先,没有实施有效的策略来确保参与者阅读他们指定的文本,而且对数据的检查表明,许多参与者的阅读时间表明他们没有接触到这种操作。其次,进一步的检查表明,对 Panero 等人(2016)有较大贡献的两项最大研究由于条件的随机分配明显失败而不是有效的实验。这些对实验内部有效性的威胁使得 Panero 等人(2016)提出的结论站不住脚。在去除了参与者未接触到操作的情况和没有随机分配的两项研究的数据后,分析表明,与阅读流行类型小说相比,阅读文学小说可以提高 ToM。这一结果与先前的研究一致,表明未能仔细复制 Kidd 和 Castano(2013)的方法导致未能复制 Kidd 和 Castano(2013)的结果。(PsycINFO 数据库记录)

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验