Pin Board

Inspired by recent moves to “empty the file drawer”, I’ve decided to start the slow and tedious process of tidying up my own.* I’ve called this page the “pin board” because that’s more reflective of my own practices – things languish on a note-to-self, hanging on a wall in my office – than what a “file drawer” might evoke. In particular, I don’t want to imply that I have left some studies out of published projects; this page is more like Roger Giner-Sorolla’s lab-wise file drawer.** Where the lab has an N = 1, and lives anywhere I live.

Please contact me if you are interested in more details about any of these studies/ideas!

In no particular order…

Intuitive thinking and belief in God (2012)

In this study, we tried to replicate and extend Shenhav, Rand, and Greene (2012), Study 3: We wanted to know whether being primed with an intuitive thinking style would increase religious belief also among atheists. The best (and worst) part of running this study was the recruitment. It was incredibly easy to recruit atheists from our university (we posted the study to the university’s “Atheist Club” facebook group, and bam), but incredibly hard to recruit Christians for comparison (we posted the study to the university’s (very active!) “Christian Club” facebook group, sent emails, begged and pleaded; but nope).

Why it never got published:
We didn’t replicate the original effect, nor did we find support for our alternative hypothesis (that an intuitive prime would shift atheists more towards strongly endorsing their non-religious beliefs). It was all just a big fat null, and we all know what happened to nulls back in 2012… to be fair to the original study though, this failure to replicate is not particularly damning. Our sample was very different (all self-identified atheists; perhaps hard to shift their beliefs), and it was also not all that big (N around 40 per cell).

Status of Methods+Data
I have both. And, bonus! Kristin Laurin and Holly Engstrom put out a call for studies to be included in a meta-analysis on religious belief in November 2017, and sent them this data. So it may yet be put to some use, which is nice.

Moral judgments under cognitive load (2013-2014)

This study got as far as being rejected two or three times, before we gave up. We gave up partly because we tried to add a second study to the first one (which I actually presented as a poster at SPSP 2014), but we changed too many things at once (sigh) and so the confusing results remained confusing. I hope to one day run a direct replication of the original study – I actually feel fairly confident the results will come out the same, though that might be naïve of me – and then try again to publish it.

Why it never got published (yet!)
I guess for this one, I can blame reviewers and editors…? Some of the comments were very good though; I wish we’d had a revise and resubmit.

Status of Methods+Data
I have both, and can send you the (rejected) manuscript as well. This data is also included in a meta-analysis (Feltz & May, 2017), which I am perhaps disproportionately excited about.

Suspicion and face detection (2013)

This study had, and has, nothing to do with any of my other interests. But it was the first time I was exposed to the idea that as a PhD student, if I thought of a question that I wanted answered, and google scholar yielded nothing, I could… just do the research myself! It was super exciting, even if the effect was null. Research question: Does dispositional suspicion lead to a larger number of false-positives when detecting faces in noisy stimuli? Answer:  We didn’t find a correlation, with N = 50.

Why it never got published
The initial results weren’t very promising, and it wasn’t in our main area of interest, so we just dropped it.

Status of Methods+Data
I have the materials, but not the data. Can put you in touch with my collaborator though!

A survey of responses to the “replicability crisis” in psychology (2015-2017)

In 2015 I ran a study with academic psychologists as participants, investigating their thoughts and feelings about the replicability crisis. The materials and data are available on the project’s OSF page, and I also wrote two short papers (available as preprints) on the basis of this data:

Why it never got published:
I submitted the first paper three or four times to different journals, and the second one once, incorporating feedback from reviewers each time – but in the end the study’s flaws weren’t ones I could address without redesigning the whole thing and collecting more data. Maybe one day I’ll do that, but for now I’ll find other ways to contribute to the replicability-etc discussion.


More studies to follow. 🙂


*Starting this pin-board was also partly inspired by @deevybee’s post on the back log, which I happened across the other day.

**Also, there are other (excellent) things called the Psych File Drawer, and I don’t want to steal their thunder. 😉


Go to home page