Loading...
Crowdsourcing hypothesis tests: Making transparent how design choices shape research results
Landy, Justin F. Jia, Miaolei Ding, Isabel L. Viganola, Domenico Tierney, Warren Dreber, Anna Johannesson, Magnus Pfeiffer, Thomas Ebersole, Charles R. Gronau, Quentin F.
Landy, Justin F.
Jia, Miaolei
Ding, Isabel L.
Viganola, Domenico
Tierney, Warren
Dreber, Anna
Johannesson, Magnus
Pfeiffer, Thomas
Ebersole, Charles R.
Gronau, Quentin F.
Citations
Altmetric:
Genre
Post-print
Date
2020-01-16
Advisor
Committee member
Group
Department
Sport and Recreation Management
Permanent link to this record
Collections
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Journal Issue
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000220
Abstract
To what extent are research results influenced by subjective decisions that scientists make as they design studies? Fifteen research teams independently designed studies to answer five original research questions related to moral judgments, negotiations, and implicit cognition. Participants from 2 separate large samples (total N > 15,000) were then randomly assigned to complete 1 version of each study. Effect sizes varied dramatically across different sets of materials designed to test the same hypothesis: Materials from different teams rendered statistically significant effects in opposite directions for 4 of 5 hypotheses, with the narrowest range in estimates being d = −0.37 to + 0.26. Meta-analysis and a Bayesian perspective on the results revealed overall support for 2 hypotheses and a lack of support for 3 hypotheses. Overall, practically none of the variability in effect sizes was attributable to the skill of the research team in designing materials, whereas considerable variability was attributable to the hypothesis being tested. In a forecasting survey, predictions of other scientists were significantly correlated with study results, both across and within hypotheses. Crowdsourced testing of research hypotheses helps reveal the true consistency of empirical support for a scientific claim.
Description
Citation
Crowdsourcing Hypothesis Tests Collaboration, & Albers, C. (2020). Crowdsourcing hypothesis tests: Making transparent how design choices shape research results. Psychological Bulletin, 146(5), 451–479. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000220
Citation to related work
© American Psychological Association, [2020]. This paper is not the copy of record and may not exactly replicate the authoritative document published in the APA journal. The final article is available, upon publication, at: https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000220
Has part
Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 146, Iss. 5
ADA compliance
For Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accommodation, including help with reading this content, please contact scholarshare@temple.edu