Department of Marketing.
Department of Management.
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2019 Apr;148(4):e1-e11. doi: 10.1037/xge0000527.
Replication research holds an increasingly important place in modern psychological science. If such work is to improve the state of knowledge rather than add confusion, however, replication attempts must be held to high standards of rigor. As an example of how replication attempts can add confusion rather than clarity, we consider an article by Shanks and colleagues (2015). They conducted a meta-analysis of studies examining romantic motivation, using problematic criteria for the inclusion of effects and reached conclusions of a null effect that were unwarranted. A more rigorous and defensible approach, relying on a representative analysis of effects and p-curves, suggests a different, more positive conclusion with no evidence of p-hacking. Shanks et al. also conducted several experiments that suffered from numerous issues, such as relying on inappropriate subject samples (e.g., older adults likely to be less sensitive to mating manipulations than college students used in previous research), altered research methods, and demonstrably weak manipulations, among other problems. We discuss the broader implications of this case, to illustrate both the opportunities and the pitfalls inherent in attempts to replicate contextually sensitive research. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).
复制研究在现代心理学中占据着越来越重要的地位。然而，如果此类工作旨在增进知识而非增添混乱，那么复制尝试就必须达到严格的高标准。为了说明复制尝试如何增添混乱而非澄清问题，我们以 Shanks 及其同事（2015 年）的一篇文章为例。他们对考察浪漫动机的研究进行了元分析，所采用的纳入效应的标准存在问题，得出的无效效应结论是没有依据的。一种更严格、更合理的方法是，依赖于对效应和 p 值曲线的代表性分析，这表明没有 p 值操纵证据的情况下，会得出不同的、更积极的结论。Shanks 等人还进行了几项实验，但存在许多问题，例如依赖于不适当的受试者样本（例如，与之前研究中使用的大学生相比，年龄较大的成年人可能对交配操作不太敏感）、改变了研究方法以及明显较弱的操作等。我们讨论了这一案例的更广泛影响，以说明在尝试复制情境敏感研究时所固有的机会和陷阱。（PsycINFO 数据库记录（c）2019 APA，保留所有权利）。
