Professor Zak’s empirical studies on trust and oxytocin
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Some intranasal oxytocin studies have been sharply criticised for extravagant data interpretations and unorthodox statistical practices.
“extravagant data interpretations and unorthodox uses of statistics in some of these studies have been incisively criticised (97)”
From Intranasal Oxytocin: Myths and Delusions (2016) · cites this paper as [97]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 23 · Cited by 22
- Authors
- Conlisk, J.
- Affiliations
- University of California San Diego (US)
- Corresponding author
- Conlisk, John
- Venue
- Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2011-04
- Volume
- 78
- Issue
- 1-2
- Pages
- 160-166
- ISSN
- 0167-2681 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2036107800
- Cited by
- 22
- References
- 23
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 4.14
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Neuroendocrine regulation and behavior
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Economic Theory and Institutions
- Keywords
- trust, oxytocin, market behavior, morality, experimental economics
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