The DOI matches its Crossref record; 21 of the 21 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Stimulus Sampling and Social Psychological Experimentation
Abstract
The authors discuss the problem with failing to sample stimuli in social psychological experimentation. Although commonly construed as an issue for external validity, the authors emphasize how failure to sample stimuli also can threaten construct validity. They note some circumstances where the need for stimulus sampling is less obvious and more obvious, and they discuss some well-known cognitive biases that can contribute to the failure of researchers to see the need for stimulus sampling. Data are presented from undergraduate students (N = 106), graduate students (N = 72), and psychology faculty (N = 48) showing insensitivity to the need for stimulus sampling except when the problem is made rather obvious. Finally, some of the statistical implications of stimulus sampling with particular concern for power, effect size estimates, and data analysis strategies are noted.
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
Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1975) · Utility, Probability, and Human Decision Making · doi:10.1007/978-94-010-1834-0_8 · Cited by 22,650
(1963) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 15,085
Construct validity in psychological tests.
Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0040957 · Cited by 11,195
Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases
(1982) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511809477 · Cited by 8,240
Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases.
Shafer, G. R., Kahnerman, D., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (1984) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2288362 · Cited by 5,657
(2004) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.41-3182 · Cited by 4,690
Judgment under uncertainty: List of contributors
Kahneman, D. J., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (1982) · Cited by 4,670
Judgment under uncertainty: Causality and attribution
Kahneman, D. J., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (1982) · Cited by 4,670
Essentials of Behavioral Research: Methods and Data Analysis
Rosenthal, R., & Rosnow, R. L. (1984) · Cited by 3,925
Belief in the law of small numbers.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1971) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0031322 · Cited by 3,246
Cited by
The Chicago face database: a free stimulus set of faces and norming data
Ma, D. S., Correll, J., & Wittenbrink, B. (2015) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/s13428-014-0532-5 · Cited by 1,788
Judd, C. M., Westfall, J., & Kenny, D. A. (2012) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0028347 · Cited by 1,236
Constraints on Generality (COG): A Proposed Addition to All Empirical Papers
Simons, D. J., Shoda, Y., & Lindsay, D. S. (2017) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691617708630 · Cited by 986
Westfall, J., Kenny, D. A., & Judd, C. M. (2014) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: General · doi:10.1037/xge0000014 · Cited by 928
Measuring Attraction to Organizations
Highhouse, S., Lievens, F., & Sinar, E. F. (2003) · Educational and Psychological Measurement · doi:10.1177/0013164403258403 · Cited by 849
Metadata
- Authors
- Wells, G. L., & Windschitl, P. D.
- Venue
- Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1999-09
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 1115-1125
- ISSN
- 0146-1672 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-7433
- OpenAlex
- W1981458319
- Cited by
- 684
- References
- 21
- FWCI
- 9.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Stimulus Sampling and Social Psychological Experimentation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/01461672992512005
- The paper
- Wells, G. L., & Windschitl, P. D. (1999). Stimulus Sampling and Social Psychological Experimentation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672992512005
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.
