Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorYıldız , Ezgi
dc.date.accessioned2021-12-10T11:53:14Z
dc.date.available2021-12-10T11:53:14Z
dc.identifier.citationYıldız E., "Registered Replication Report on Srull and Wyer (1979)", Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, cilt.37, ss.321-336, 2018
dc.identifier.othervv_1032021
dc.identifier.otherav_9b22ec94-d896-4f17-92ea-b6b1116ccb36
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12627/172832
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.researchgate.net/publication/327431875_Registered_Replication_Report_on_Srull_and_Wyer_1979
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1177/2515245918777487
dc.description.abstractSrull and Wyer (1979) demonstrated that exposing participants to more hostility-related stimuli caused them subsequently to interpret ambiguous behaviors as more hostile. In their Experiment 1, participants descrambled sets of words to form sentences. In one condition, 80% of the descrambled sentences described hostile behaviors, and in another condition, 20% described hostile behaviors. Following the descrambling task, all participants read a vignette about a man named Donald who behaved in an ambiguously hostile manner and then rated him on a set of personality traits. Next, participants rated the hostility of various ambiguously hostile behaviors (all ratings on scales from 0 to 10). Participants who descrambled mostly hostile sentences rated Donald and the ambiguous behaviors as approximately 3 scale points more hostile than did those who descrambled mostly neutral sentences. This Registered Replication Report describes the results of 26 independent replications (N = 7,373 in the total sample; k = 22 labs and N = 5,610 in the primary analyses) of Srull and Wyer’s Experiment 1, each of which followed a preregistered and vetted protocol. A random-effects meta-analysis showed that the protagonist was seen as 0.08 scale points more hostile when participants were primed with 80% hostile sentences than when they were primed with 20% hostile sentences (95% confidence interval, CI = [0.004, 0.16]). The ambiguously hostile behaviors were seen as 0.08 points less hostile when participants were primed with 80% hostile sentences than when they were primed with 20% hostile sentences (95% CI = [−0.18, 0.01]). Although the confidence interval for one outcome excluded zero and the observed effect was in the predicted direction, these results suggest that the currently used methods do not produce an assimilative priming effect that is practically and routinely detectable.
dc.language.isoeng
dc.subjectSosyal Bilimler (SOC)
dc.subjectSosyal ve Beşeri Bilimler
dc.titleRegistered Replication Report on Srull and Wyer (1979)
dc.typeMakale
dc.relation.journalAdvances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science
dc.contributor.departmentÜsküdar Üniversitesi , İnsan Ve Toplum Bilimleri Fakültesi , Psikoloji Bölümü
dc.identifier.volume37
dc.identifier.startpage321
dc.identifier.endpage336
dc.contributor.firstauthorID2686072


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record