Many Labs 3: Evaluating participant pool quality across the academic semester via replication

Charles R. Ebersole*, Olivia E. Atherton, Aimee L. Belanger, Hayley M. Skulborstad, Jill M. Allen, Jonathan B. Banks, Erica Baranski, Michael J. Bernstein, Diane B. V. Bonfiglio, Leanne Boucher, Elizabeth R. Brown, Nancy I. Budiman, Athena H. Cairo, Colin A. Capaldi, Christopher R. Chartier, J.M.H. Chung, David C. Cicero, Jennifer A. Coleman, John G. Conway, William E. DavisThierry Devos, Melody M. Fletcher, Komi German, Jon E. Grahe, Anthony D. Hermann, Joshua A. Hicks, Nathan Honeycutt, Brandon Humphrey, Matthew Janus, David J. Johnson, Jennifer A. Joy-Gaba, Hannah Juzeler, Ashley Keres, Diana Kinney, Jacqeline Kirshenbaum, Richard A. Klein, Richard E. Lucas, Christopher J. N. Lustgraaf, Daniel Martin, Madhavi Menon, Mitchell Metzger, Jaclyn M. Moloney, Patrick J. Morse, Radmila Prislin, Timothy Razza, Daniel E. Re, Nicholas O. Rule, Tdonald F. Sacco, Kyle Sauerberger, Emily Shrider, Megan Shultz, Courtney Siemsen, Karin Sobocko, R. Weylin Sternglanz, Amy Summerville, Konstantin O. Tskhay, Zack van Allen, Leigh Ann Vaughn, Ryan J. Walker, Ashley Weinberg, John Paul Wilson, James H. Wirth, Jessica Wortman, Brian A. Nosek

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

Abstract

The university participant pool is a key resource for behavioral research, and data quality is believed to vary over the course of the academic semester. This crowdsourced project examined time of semester variation in 10 known effects, 10 individual differences, and 3 data quality indicators over the course of the academic semester in 20 participant pools (N = 2696) and with an online sample (N = 737). Weak time of semester effects were observed on data quality indicators, participant sex, and a few individual differences conscientiousness, mood, and stress. However, there was little evidence for time of semester qualifying experimental or correlational effects. The generality of this evidence is unknown because only a subset of the tested effects demonstrated evidence for the original result in the whole sample. Mean characteristics of pool samples change slightly during the semester, but these data suggest that those changes are mostly irrelevant for detecting effects. (C) 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)68-82
JournalJournal of Experimental Social Psychology
Volume67
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Nov 2016

Keywords

  • Social psychology
  • Cognitive psychology
  • Replication
  • Participant pool
  • Individual differences
  • Sampling effects
  • Situational effects
  • SELF-ESTEEM
  • SUBJECT POOL
  • PERSONALITY
  • COGNITION
  • NEED
  • TIME
  • INTERFERENCE
  • METAANALYSIS
  • INFORMATION
  • METAPHORS

Cite this

Ebersole, C. R., Atherton, O. E., Belanger, A. L., Skulborstad, H. M., Allen, J. M., Banks, J. B., Baranski, E., Bernstein, M. J., Bonfiglio, D. B. V., Boucher, L., Brown, E. R., Budiman, N. I., Cairo, A. H., Capaldi, C. A., Chartier, C. R., Chung, J. M. H., Cicero, D. C., Coleman, J. A., Conway, J. G., ... Nosek, B. A. (2016). Many Labs 3: Evaluating participant pool quality across the academic semester via replication. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 67, 68-82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2015.10.012