Is there evidence of publication biases in JDM research?
Journal Title: Judgment and Decision Making - Year 2011, Vol 6, Issue 8
Abstract
It is a long known problem that the preferential publication of statistically significant results (publication bias) may lead to incorrect estimates of the true effects being investigated. Even though other research areas (e.g., medicine, biology) are aware of the problem, and have identified strong publication biases, researchers in judgment and decision making (JDM) largely ignore it. We reanalyzed two current meta-analyses in this area. Both showed evidence of publication biases that may have led to a substantial overestimation of the true effects they investigated. A review of additional JDM meta-analyses shows that most meta-analyses conducted no or insufficient analyses of publication bias. However, given our results and the rareness of non-significant effects in the literature, we suspect that biases occur quite often. These findings suggest that (a) conclusions based on meta-analyses without reported tests of publication bias should be interpreted with caution and (b) publication policies and standard research practices should be revised to overcome the problem.
Authors and Affiliations
Frank Renkewitz, Heather M. Fuchs and Susann Fiedler
Keywords
Related Articles
- EP ID EP677869
- DOI -
- Views 120
- Downloads 0
Semantic cross-scale numerical anchoring
Anchoring effects are robust, varied and can be consequential. Researchers have provided a variety of alternative explanations for these effects. More recently, it has become apparent that anchoring effects might be prod...
An attempt to clarify the link between cognitive style and political ideology: A non-western replication and extension
Previous studies relating low-effort or intuitive thinking to political conservatism are limited to Western cultures. Using Turkish and predominantly Muslim samples, Study 1 found that analytic cognitive style (ACS) is n...
Salient nutrition labels increase the integration of health attributes in food decision-making
Every day, people struggle to make healthy eating decisions. Nutrition labels have been used to help people properly balance the tradeoff between healthiness and taste, but research suggests that these labels vary in the...
Moody experts — How mood and expertise influence judgmental anchoring
Anchoring effects, the assimilation of numerical estimates to previously considered standards, are highly robust. Two studies examined whether mood and expertise jointly moderate the magnitude of anchoring. Previous rese...
Attachment to land: The case of the land of Israel for American and Israeli Jews and the role of contagion
This is a first study on attachment to national and sacred land and land as a protected value. A measure of attachment to the land of Israel is developed and administered to two groups, Jewish college students in Israel...