The DOI matches its Crossref record; 11 of the 11 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Registered Reports: A new publishing initiative at Cortex
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Why Most Published Research Findings Are False
Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2005) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124 · Cited by 10,505
The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results.
Rosenthal, R. (1979) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.86.3.638 · Cited by 9,068
Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., & Simonsohn, U. (2011) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0956797611417632 · Cited by 6,567
Why Most Published Research Findings Are False
Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2005) · CHANCE · doi:10.1080/09332480.2005.10722754 · Cited by 4,702 · cited 1×
“…statistical power (Chase and Chase, 1976; Tressoldi, 2012), poor replicability (Pashler and Wagenmakers, 2012), undisclosed analytic flexibility (Bakker et al., 2012; Masicampo and Lalande, 2012; Simmons et al., 2011; Wagenmakers, 2007) and a lack of data transparency (Ioannidis, 2005).”
BackgroundA practical solution to the pervasive problems ofp values
Wagenmakers, E.-J. (2007) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/bf03194105 · Cited by 2,490
Pashler, H., & Wagenmakers, E. (2012) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691612465253 · Cited by 1,321
Nosek (2012) · doi:10.1177/1745691612459058 · Cited by 1,301
Publication bias in meta-analysis its causes and consequences
Thornton, A. (2000) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/s0895-4356(99)00161-4 · Cited by 1,291 · cited 2×
“The life sciences in general, and psychology / cognitive neuroscience in particular, suffer from publication bias (Faneli, 2010; Rosenthal, 1979; Thornton and Lee, 2000), insufficient statistical power (Chase and Chase, 1976; Tressoldi, 2012), poor replicability (Pashler and Wagenmakers, 2012),…”
BackgroundThe rules of the game called psychological science
Bakker, M., van Dijk, A., & Wicherts, J. M. (2012) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691612459060 · Cited by 800
“Positive” results increase down the Hierarchy of the Sciences
Fanelli, D. (2010) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0010068 · Cited by 734
A peculiar prevalence of p values just below .05
Masicampo, E. J., & Lalande, D. R. (2012) · Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1080/17470218.2012.711335 · Cited by 266 · cited 1×
“…statistical power (Chase and Chase, 1976; Tressoldi, 2012), poor replicability (Pashler and Wagenmakers, 2012), undisclosed analytic flexibility (Bakker et al., 2012; Masicampo and Lalande, 2012; Simmons et al., 2011; Wagenmakers, 2007) and a lack of data transparency (Ioannidis, 2005).”
Background
Research works printed but not linked: 6
- Chase, 1976, A statistical power analysis of applied psychological research, Journal of Applied Psychology, 61, 234, 10.1037/0021-9010.61.2.234 · DOI
- Della Sala, 2013, Nothing endures but change, Cortex, 49, 1, 10.1016/j.cortex.2012.11.003 · doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2012.11.003
- Fiedler, 2012, The long way from α-error control to validity proper: Problems with a short-sighted false-positive debate, Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 661, 10.1177/1745691612462587 · DOI · Paper page
- John, 2012, Measuring the prevalence of questionable research practices with incentives for truth telling, Psychological Science, 23, 524, 10.1177/0956797611430953 · DOI · Paper page
- Neuroskeptic, 2012, The nine circles of scientific hell, Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 643, 10.1177/1745691612459519 · DOI
- Tressoldi, 2012, Replication unreliability in psychology: elusive phenomena or “elusive” statistical power?, Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 218, 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00218 · DOI
Cited by
Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience
Button, K. S., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Mokrysz, C., Nosek, B. A., Flint, J., Robinson, E. S. J., & Munafò, M. R. (2013) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn3475 · Cited by 7,641
A manifesto for reproducible science
Munafò, M. R., Nosek, B. A., Bishop, D. V. M., Button, K. S., Chambers, C. D., Percie du Sert, N., Simonsohn, U., Wagenmakers, E.-J., Ware, J. J., & Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2017) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-016-0021 · Cited by 3,397
Self-citationPromoting an open research culture
Nosek, B. A., Alter, G., Banks, G. C., Borsboom, D., Bowman, S. D., Breckler, S. J., Buck, S., Chambers, C. D., Chin, G., Christensen, G., et al. (2015) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aab2374 · Cited by 2,708
Self-citationBayesian inference for psychology. Part I: Theoretical advantages and practical ramifications
Wagenmakers, E.-J., Marsman, M., Jamil, T., Ly, A., Verhagen, J., Love, J., Selker, R., Gronau, Q. F., Šmíra, M., Epskamp, S., et al. (2018) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/s13423-017-1343-3 · Cited by 1,627
The association between adolescent well-being and digital technology use
Orben, A., & Przybylski, A. K. (2019) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-018-0506-1 · Cited by 1,500
Metadata
- Authors
- Chambers, C. D.
- Venue
- Cortex
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2013-03
- Volume
- 49
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 609-610
- ISSN
- 0010-9452 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2002030061
- Cited by
- 570
- References
- 11
- FWCI
- 36.99
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
