Many Labs 5: Replication of van Dijk, van Kleef, Steinel, and van Beest (2008)

IF 15.6 1区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science Pub Date : 2020-09-01 DOI:10.1177/2515245920927643

Lauren Skorb, B. Aczel, Bence Bakos, Lily Feinberg, Ewa Hałasa, Mathias Kauff, Márton Kovács, Karolina Krasuska, Katarzyna Kuchno, Dylan Manfredi, Andres Montealegre, Emilian Pękala, Damian Pieńkosz, Jonathan D Ravid, K. Rentzsch, B. Szaszi, S. Schulz-Hardt, Barbara Sioma, Péter Szécsi, Attila Szuts, Orsolya Szöke, O. Christ, A. Fedor, William Jiménez-Leal, Rafał Muda, G. Nave, Janos Salamon, T. Schultze, Joshua K. Hartshorne

{"title":"Many Labs 5: Replication of van Dijk, van Kleef, Steinel, and van Beest (2008)","authors":"Lauren Skorb, B. Aczel, Bence Bakos, Lily Feinberg, Ewa Hałasa, Mathias Kauff, Márton Kovács, Karolina Krasuska, Katarzyna Kuchno, Dylan Manfredi, Andres Montealegre, Emilian Pękala, Damian Pieńkosz, Jonathan D Ravid, K. Rentzsch, B. Szaszi, S. Schulz-Hardt, Barbara Sioma, Péter Szécsi, Attila Szuts, Orsolya Szöke, O. Christ, A. Fedor, William Jiménez-Leal, Rafał Muda, G. Nave, Janos Salamon, T. Schultze, Joshua K. Hartshorne","doi":"10.1177/2515245920927643","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As part of the Many Labs 5 project, we ran a replication of van Dijk, van Kleef, Steinel, and van Beest’s (2008) study examining the effect of emotions in negotiations. They reported that when the consequences of rejection were low, subjects offered fewer chips to angry bargaining partners than to happy partners. We ran this replication under three protocols: the protocol used in the Reproducibility Project: Psychology, a revised protocol, and an online protocol. The effect averaged one ninth the size of the originally reported effect and was significant only for the revised protocol. However, the difference between the original and revised protocols was not significant.","PeriodicalId":55645,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science","volume":"3 1","pages":"418 - 428"},"PeriodicalIF":15.6000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/2515245920927643","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245920927643","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

Abstract

As part of the Many Labs 5 project, we ran a replication of van Dijk, van Kleef, Steinel, and van Beest’s (2008) study examining the effect of emotions in negotiations. They reported that when the consequences of rejection were low, subjects offered fewer chips to angry bargaining partners than to happy partners. We ran this replication under three protocols: the protocol used in the Reproducibility Project: Psychology, a revised protocol, and an online protocol. The effect averaged one ninth the size of the originally reported effect and was significant only for the revised protocol. However, the difference between the original and revised protocols was not significant.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

许多实验室5：范迪克、范克莱夫、施泰内尔和范比斯特的复制（2008）

作为Many Labs 5项目的一部分，我们复制了van Dijk、van Kleef、Steinel和van Beest（2008）的研究，研究了情绪在谈判中的影响。他们报告说，当拒绝的后果很低时，受试者向愤怒的讨价还价伙伴提供的筹码比向快乐的伙伴提供的更少。我们在三个协议下进行了复制：再现性项目中使用的协议：心理学、修订后的协议和在线协议。该效应的平均大小是最初报告的效应的九分之一，仅在修订后的方案中具有显著性。然而，原始方案和修订方案之间的差异并不显著。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science Multiple-

CiteScore

21.20

自引率

0.70%

发文量

期刊介绍： In 2021, Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science will undergo a transition to become an open access journal. This journal focuses on publishing innovative developments in research methods, practices, and conduct within the field of psychological science. It embraces a wide range of areas and topics and encourages the integration of methodological and analytical questions. The aim of AMPPS is to bring the latest methodological advances to researchers from various disciplines, even those who are not methodological experts. Therefore, the journal seeks submissions that are accessible to readers with different research interests and that represent the diverse research trends within the field of psychological science. The types of content that AMPPS welcomes include articles that communicate advancements in methods, practices, and metascience, as well as empirical scientific best practices. Additionally, tutorials, commentaries, and simulation studies on new techniques and research tools are encouraged. The journal also aims to publish papers that bring advances from specialized subfields to a broader audience. Lastly, AMPPS accepts Registered Replication Reports, which focus on replicating important findings from previously published studies. Overall, the transition of Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science to an open access journal aims to increase accessibility and promote the dissemination of new developments in research methods and practices within the field of psychological science.