The role of meta-analysis and preregistration in assessing the evidence for cleansing effects

Robert M. Ross*, Robbie C. M. van Aert, Olmo R. van den Akker, Michiel van Elk

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/Letter to the editorScientificpeer-review

Abstract

Lee and Schwarz interpret meta-analytic research and replication studies as providing evidence for the robustness of cleansing effects. We argue that the currently available evidence is unconvincing because (a) publication bias and the opportunistic use of researcher degrees of freedom appear to have inflated meta-analytic effect size estimates, and (b) preregistered replications failed to find any evidence of cleansing effects.

Original languageEnglish
Article numbere19
Number of pages2
JournalBehavioral and Brain Sciences
Volume44
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2021

Keywords

  • PUBLICATION BIAS

Cite this