The role of meta-analysis and preregistration in assessing the evidence for cleansing effects

Lee and Schwarz interpret meta-analytic research and replication studies as providing evidence for the robustness of cleansing effects. We argue that the currently available evidence is unconvincing because (a) publication bias and the opportunistic use of researcher degrees of freedom appear to hav...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inThe Behavioral and brain sciences Vol. 44; p. e19
Main Authors Ross, Robert M., van Aert, Robbie C. M., van den Akker, Olmo R., van Elk, Michiel
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published New York, USA Cambridge University Press 18.02.2021
Subjects
Bias
Meta-analysis
Open Peer Commentary
Systematic review
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:Lee and Schwarz interpret meta-analytic research and replication studies as providing evidence for the robustness of cleansing effects. We argue that the currently available evidence is unconvincing because (a) publication bias and the opportunistic use of researcher degrees of freedom appear to have inflated meta-analytic effect size estimates, and (b) preregistered replications failed to find any evidence of cleansing effects.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-3
content type line 23
ObjectType-Commentary-1
ISSN:0140-525X
1469-1825
DOI:10.1017/S0140525X20000606