Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Classic and contemporary psychology experiments replicated

cos.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–36 of 36 posts

Re: Classic and contemporary psychology experiments replicated

#31

Post by throw2016 »

Poor choice of headline for the original article given 'replicated' indicates success. This was an intensive attempt to replicate but 14 of the 28 did not replicate.

That is a 50 percent failure rate inspite of using over 186 researchers in 60 labs worldwide. The widely reported 2012 study could not replicate nearly 100 of 100 studies. And in this case if this kind of comprehensive effort can't replicate half the studies it raises serious questions about the original studies and adds more fuel to the reproducibility crisis.

Given studies are routinely used to justify and implement policies [1], and taken seriously as points of authority it's not just academic.

There needs to be much larger discussion on the use of studies to direct policy that impact real lives, and the level of oversight, additional replication and other credibility building measures that need to be considered.

[1] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S001632871...

Re: Classic and contemporary psychology experiments replicated

#32

Post by tylerjwilk00 »

jhedwards wrote: post #27
tylerjwilk00 wrote: post #23

The thing with psychology experiments is that the fundamental thing being tested is not immutable. This makes it different than many other science experiments where concrete parts of reality are tested. Psychology really only tests the minds of humans in a global society at a point in time. If future minds change enough the results may no longer be valid.

Your statement in itself is a hypothesis to be proved. There are psychology experiments designed specifically to ascertain what parts of the mind are hard-wired and which are depended on nurture/culture. I am not a Psychologist but I can give one example: Piaget hypothesized that the mind developed by first accumulating low-level sensory/motor data, and then progressively building higher levels of abstraction on that…

The mind is mutable.

Psychology is different than other "hard" sciences.

I only say "results _may_ no longer be valid" and I'd say this study proves that.

If you go deep enough into the mind to the point where social environment no longer influences the behavior you may be getting closer to biology than psychology but point taken.

Re: Classic and contemporary psychology experiments replicated

#33

Post by tropo »

sys_64738 wrote: post #14
andrelaszlo wrote: post #7

List of studies, and the outcome: 1 Direction & SES (Huang et al., 2014) p 2 Structure and goal-pursuit (Kay et al., 2014) p=0.97 3 Incidental disfluency (Alter et al., 2007) p=0.67 4 Moral Foundations (Graham et al., 2009) p 5 Affect and Risk (Rottenstreich & Hsee, 2001) p=0.77 6 Priming consumerism (Bauer et al., 2012) p=0.15 7 Correspondence Bias (Miyamoto & Kitayama, 2002) p 8 Disgust & Homophobia (Inbar et al.,…

None of the classics.

Nobody wants to touch some of the classics, at least in the USA. Like this one:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pit_of_despair

Scientifically, it might be of value to replicate the experiments, but I really can't imagine anybody attempting them.

Re: Classic and contemporary psychology experiments replicated

#34

Post by pbhjpbhj »

tylerjwilk00 wrote: post #23

The thing with psychology experiments is that the fundamental thing being tested is not immutable. This makes it different than many other science experiments where concrete parts of reality are tested. Psychology really only tests the minds of humans in a global society at a point in time. If future minds change enough the results may no longer be valid.

>This makes it different than many other science experiments where concrete parts of reality are tested. //

Maybe, or maybe immutability is axiomatic in those other areas.

Re: Classic and contemporary psychology experiments replicated

#35

Post by pbhjpbhj »

bluetwo wrote: post #5

I'm just going to point out that the ridiculous idea that using a hard to read font improves retention of information was disproven.

Why do you class that as "ridiculous"? A mechanism by which that might be true leaps readily to mind.

Re: Classic and contemporary psychology experiments replicated

#36

Post by bluetwo »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #35
bluetwo wrote: post #5

I'm just going to point out that the ridiculous idea that using a hard to read font improves retention of information was disproven.

Why do you class that as "ridiculous"? A mechanism by which that might be true leaps readily to mind.

Because the science behind building better instruction already exists and does not rely on parlor tricks to make poor instruction more memorable.
Post reply on HN