scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Sarah R. Schiavone

Bio: Sarah R. Schiavone is an academic researcher from University of Kentucky. The author has contributed to research in topics: Credibility & Empirical research. The author has an hindex of 1, co-authored 1 publications receiving 112 citations.

Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Gervais et al. as discussed by the authors present evidence from 13 different countries that shows intuitive moral distrust of atheists is pervasive, even among atheists themselves, and conclude that the distrust is even among the majority of atheists themselves.
Abstract: Gervais et al . present evidence from 13 different countries that shows intuitive moral distrust of atheists is pervasive, even among atheists themselves.

128 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The authors examined the types of limitations authors discuss in their published articles by categorizing them according to the four validities framework and investigate whether the field's attention to each of the four validity concerns has shifted from 2010 to 2020.
Abstract: Every research project has limitations. The limitations that authors acknowledge in their articles offer a glimpse into some of the concerns that occupy a field's attention. We examine the types of limitations authors discuss in their published articles by categorizing them according to the four validities framework and investigate whether the field's attention to each of the four validities has shifted from 2010 to 2020. We selected one journal in social and personality psychology (Social Psychological and Personality Science; SPPS), the subfield most in the crosshairs of psychology's replication crisis. We sampled 440 articles (with half of those articles containing a subsection explicitly addressing limitations), and we identified and categorized 831 limitations across the 440 articles. Articles with limitations sections reported more limitations than those without (avg. 2.6 vs. 1.2 limitations per article). Threats to external validity were the most common type of reported limitation (est. 52% of articles), and threats to statistical conclusion validity were the least common (est. 17% of articles). Authors reported slightly more limitations over time. Despite the extensive attention paid to statistical conclusion validity in the scientific discourse throughout psychology's credibility revolution, our results suggest that concerns about statistics-related issues were not reflected in social and personality psychologists' reported limitations. The high prevalence of limitations concerning external validity might suggest it is time that we improve our practices in this area, rather than apologizing for these limitations after the fact. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

2 citations

Posted ContentDOI
TL;DR: The credibility of empirical legal research has been questioned in the past due to its distinctive peer review system and because the legal background of its researchers means that many often are not trained in study design or statistics as mentioned in this paper .
Abstract: Scientists are increasingly concerned with making their work easy to verify and build upon. Associated practices include sharing data, materials, and analytic scripts, and preregistering protocols. This has been referred to as a “credibility revolution”. The credibility of empirical legal research has been questioned in the past due to its distinctive peer review system and because the legal background of its researchers means that many often are not trained in study design or statistics. Still, there has been no systematic study of transparency and credibility-related characteristics of published empirical legal research. To fill this gap and provide an estimate of current practices that can be tracked as the field evolves, we assessed 300 empirical articles from highly ranked law journals including both faculty-edited journals and student-edited journals. We found high levels of article accessibility (86% could be accessed without a subscription, 95% CI = [82%, 90%]), especially among student-edited journals (100% accessibility). Few articles stated that a study’s data are available, (19%, 95% CI = [15%, 23%]), and only about half of those datasets are reportedly available without contacting the author. Preregistration (3%, 95% CI = [1%, 5%]) and availability of analytic scripts (6%, 95% = [4%, 9%]) were very uncommon. We suggest that empirical legal researchers and the journals that publish their work cultivate norms and practices to encourage research credibility.

1 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The replication crisis and credibility revolution in the 2010s brought a wave of doubts about the credibility of social and personality psychology as mentioned in this paper , and the field responded to this crisis by taking the steps necessary to address our problems and simply declare the crisis to be over or the problems to be fixed without evidence.
Abstract: The replication crisis and credibility revolution in the 2010s brought a wave of doubts about the credibility of social and personality psychology. We argue that as a field, we must reckon with the concerns brought to light during this critical decade. How the field responds to this crisis will reveal our commitment to self-correction. If we do not take the steps necessary to address our problems and simply declare the crisis to be over or the problems to be fixed without evidence, we risk further undermining our credibility. To fully reckon with this crisis, we must empirically assess the state of the field to take stock of how credible our science actually is and whether it is improving. We propose an agenda for metascientific research, and we review approaches to empirically evaluate and track where we are as a field (e.g., analyzing the published literature, surveying researchers). We describe one such project (Surveying the Past and Present State of Published Studies in Social and Personality Psychology) underway in our research group. Empirical evidence about the state of our field is necessary if we are to take self-correction seriously and if we hope to avert future crises.
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The credibility of empirical legal research has been questioned in the past due to its distinctive peer review system and because the legal background of its researchers means that many often are not trained in study design or statistics as discussed by the authors .
Abstract: Background: Scientists are increasingly concerned with making their work easy to verify and build upon. Associated practices include sharing data, materials, and analytic scripts, and preregistering protocols. This shift towards increased transparency and rigor has been referred to as a “credibility revolution.” The credibility of empirical legal research has been questioned in the past due to its distinctive peer review system and because the legal background of its researchers means that many often are not trained in study design or statistics. Still, there has been no systematic study of transparency and credibility-related characteristics of published empirical legal research. Methods: To fill this gap and provide an estimate of current practices that can be tracked as the field evolves, we assessed 300 empirical articles from highly ranked law journals including both faculty-edited journals and student-edited journals. Results: We found high levels of article accessibility, especially among student-edited journals. Few articles stated that a study’s data are available. Preregistration and availability of analytic scripts were very uncommon. Conclusion: We suggest that empirical legal researchers and the journals that publish their work cultivate norms and practices to encourage research credibility. Our estimates may be revisited to track the field’s progress in the coming years.

Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A novel method for constructing IATs using online survey software (Qualtrics) is introduced and its validity is empirically assessed; it appears to be reliable and valid, offer numerous advantages, and make I ATs accessible for researchers who use survey software to conduct online research.
Abstract: The implicit association test (IAT) is widely used in psychology Unfortunately, the IAT cannot be run within online surveys, requiring researchers who conduct online surveys to rely on third-party tools We introduce a novel method for constructing IATs using online survey software (Qualtrics); we then empirically assess its validity Study 1 (student n = 239) revealed good psychometric properties, expected IAT effects, and expected correlations with explicit measures for survey-software IATs Study 2 (MTurk n = 818) showed predicted IAT effects across four survey-software IATs (ds = 082 [Black-White IAT] to 213 [insect-flower IAT]) Study 3 (MTurk n = 270) compared survey-software IATs and IATs run via Inquisit, yielding nearly identical results and intercorrelations that would be expected for identical IATs Survey-software IATs appear to be reliable and valid, offer numerous advantages, and make IATs accessible for researchers who use survey software to conduct online research We present all the materials, links to tutorials, and an open-source tool that rapidly automates survey-software IAT construction and analysis

117 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is proposed that the cultural success of particular beliefs about the economy is predictable if the influence of specialized, largely automatic inference systems that evolved as adaptations to ancestral human small-scale sociality are considered.
Abstract: The domain of “folk-economics” consists in explicit beliefs about the economy held by laypeople, untrained in economics, about such topics as, for example, the causes of the wealth of nations, the benefits or drawbacks of markets and international trade, the effects of regulation, the origins of inequality, the connection between work and wages, the economic consequences of immigration, or the possible causes of unemployment. These beliefs are crucial in forming people's political beliefs and in shaping their reception of different policies. Yet, they often conflict with elementary principles of economic theory and are often described as the consequences of ignorance, irrationality, or specific biases. As we will argue, these past perspectives fail to predict the particular contents of popular folk-economic beliefs and, as a result, there is no systematic study of the cognitive factors involved in their emergence and cultural success. Here we propose that the cultural success of particular beliefs about the economy is predictable if we consider the influence of specialized, largely automatic inference systems that evolved as adaptations to ancestral human small-scale sociality. These systems, for which there is independent evidence, include free-rider detection, fairness-based partner choice, ownership intuitions, coalitional psychology, and more. Information about modern mass-market conditions activates these specific inference systems, resulting in particular intuitions, for example, that impersonal transactions are dangerous or that international trade is a zero-sum game. These intuitions in turn make specific policy proposals more likely than others to become intuitively compelling, and, as a consequence, exert a crucial influence on political choices.

58 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This article explored the relationship between atheism and feminism and found that women are more likely to identify with women who are not agnostic or agnostic than men, while the percentage of religiously unaffiliated women is growing in the West.
Abstract: While the percentage of religiously unaffiliated women is growing in the West, little is known about the relationship between atheism and feminism. This article redresses the gap by exploring women...

53 citations

Posted ContentDOI
TL;DR: This article found that analytic atheism is quite fickle cross-culturally, appearing robustly only in aggregate analyses and in three individual countries in the US, Canada, and Australia, and that cognitive reflection, as measured with the Cognitive Reflection Test, overrides religious intuitions and instruction.
Abstract: Religious belief is a topic of longstanding interest to psychological science, but the psychology of religious disbelief is a relative newcomer. One prominently discussed model is analytic atheism, wherein cognitive reflection, as measured with the Cognitive Reflection Test, overrides religious intuitions and instruction. Consistent with this model, performance-based measures of cognitive reflection predict religious disbelief in WEIRD (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic) samples. However, the generality of analytic atheism remains unknown. Drawing on a large global sample (N = 3461) from 13 religiously, demographically, and culturally diverse societies, we find that analytic atheism as usually assessed is in fact quite fickle cross-culturally, appearing robustly only in aggregate analyses and in three individual countries. The results provide additional evidence for culture’s effects on core beliefs.

51 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Brubaker et al. as discussed by the authors observed that while language has become much more central to public life and more politically contentious, religion has become less central to political life and less politically contentious.
Abstract: The historical reversal over the course of several centuries in the West is striking: while language has become much more central to public life and more politically contentious, religion has become less central to public life and less politically contentious, notwithstanding the resurgence of public religion in recent decades, and despite the fact that understandings of nationhood remain deeply permeated by particular religious traditions and their secular legacies. (Brubaker, 2015, p. 6) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

47 citations