Title |
Priming of Social Distance? Failure to Replicate Effects on Social and Food Judgments
|
---|---|
Published in |
PLOS ONE, August 2012
|
DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0042510 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Harold Pashler, Noriko Coburn, Christine R. Harris |
Abstract |
Williams and Bargh (2008) reported an experiment in which participants were simply asked to plot a single pair of points on a piece of graph paper, with the coordinates provided by the experimenter specifying a pair of points that lay at one of three different distances (close, intermediate, or far, relative to the range available on the graph paper). The participants who had graphed a more distant pair reported themselves as being significantly less close to members of their own family than did those who had plotted a more closely-situated pair. In another experiment, people's estimates of the caloric content of different foods were reportedly altered by the same type of spatial distance priming. Direct replications of both results were attempted, with precautions to ensure that the experimenter did not know what condition the participant was assigned to. The results showed no hint of the priming effects reported by Williams and Bargh (2008). |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United Kingdom | 10 | 26% |
United States | 6 | 15% |
Canada | 1 | 3% |
Tunisia | 1 | 3% |
France | 1 | 3% |
Ireland | 1 | 3% |
Netherlands | 1 | 3% |
Japan | 1 | 3% |
Unknown | 17 | 44% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 24 | 62% |
Scientists | 8 | 21% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 13% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 5% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Germany | 2 | 1% |
Brazil | 2 | 1% |
United States | 2 | 1% |
Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
China | 1 | <1% |
United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
Japan | 1 | <1% |
Spain | 1 | <1% |
Unknown | 133 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Ph. D. Student | 39 | 27% |
Student > Bachelor | 21 | 15% |
Student > Master | 20 | 14% |
Researcher | 15 | 10% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 8% |
Other | 27 | 19% |
Unknown | 11 | 8% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Psychology | 89 | 62% |
Business, Management and Accounting | 8 | 6% |
Social Sciences | 7 | 5% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 3% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 2% |
Other | 20 | 14% |
Unknown | 13 | 9% |