A Meta-Analytic Review of Moral Licensing
[FULL TEXT READ AT SOURCE, the scanned publisher copy hosted at pdf.stafforini.com, including the results section, the publication-bias analysis and the moderator table] Blanken, I., van de Ven, N., & Zeelenberg, M. (2015). 'A Meta-Analytic Review of Moral Licensing.' Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41(4), 540-558. doi:10.1177/0146167215572134. The pooled estimate, and the article gives it with its heterogeneity and bias numbers or not at all. 91 studies, 7,397 participants, comparing a licensing condition with a control, 57 published and 34 unpublished. Random-effects mean d = 0.31, 95 per cent confidence interval [0.23, 0.38], Z = 8.24, p < .001. Heterogeneity: tau squared = .06, 95 per cent confidence interval [.03, .11]; I squared = 54.58 per cent; Q(df = 90) = 198.17, p < .001. Their own reading: 'the moral licensing effect is small to medium in effect size. In addition, there is substantial variation of the effect size between studies.' PUBLICATION BIAS: the regression test for funnel-plot asymmetry with standard error as predictor gave t(55) = 5.72, p < .001, 'indicating the presence of a positive publication bias'; trim-and-fill estimates 21 missing studies; and the moderator test gave published studies d = 0.43, SE = 0.04, against unpublished studies d = 0.11, SE = 0.06, QM(1) = 20.66. No other theorised moderator reached significance, including induction by actions against traits, same domain against different, and negative against neutral control. Their practical conclusion: the estimate 'implies that studies require many more participants to draw solid conclusions about moral licensing and its possible moderators.' The file's figures for Mazar and Zhong 2010, study 2 n = 76 d = 0.29 and study 3 n = 81 d = 0.53, come from Blanken and colleagues' coded dataset as read in this full text, and the vault has NOT read Mazar and Zhong and cites those
[FULL TEXT READ AT SOURCE, the scanned publisher copy hosted at pdf.stafforini.com, including the results section, the publication-bias analysis and the moderator table] Blanken, I., van de Ven, N., & Zeelenberg, M. (2015). 'A Meta-Analytic Review of Moral Licensing.' Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41(4), 540-558. doi:10.1177/0146167215572134. The pooled estimate, and the article gives it with its heterogeneity and bias numbers or not at all. 91 studies, 7,397 participants, comparing a licensing condition with a control, 57 published and 34 unpublished. Random-effects mean d = 0.31, 95 per cent confidence interval [0.23, 0.38], Z = 8.24, p < .001. Heterogeneity: tau squared = .06, 95 per cent confidence interval [.03, .11]; I squared = 54.58 per cent; Q(df = 90) = 198.17, p < .001. Their own reading: 'the moral licensing effect is small to medium in effect size. In addition, there is substantial variation of the effect size between studies.' PUBLICATION BIAS: the regression test for funnel-plot asymmetry with standard error as predictor gave t(55) = 5.72, p < .001, 'indicating the presence of a positive publication bias'; trim-and-fill estimates 21 missing studies; and the moderator test gave published studies d = 0.43, SE = 0.04, against unpublished studies d = 0.11, SE = 0.06, QM(1) = 20.66. No other theorised moderator reached significance, including induction by actions against traits, same domain against different, and negative against neutral control. Their practical conclusion: the estimate 'implies that studies require many more participants to draw solid conclusions about moral licensing and its possible moderators.' The file's figures for Mazar and Zhong 2010, study 2 n = 76 d = 0.29 and study 3 n = 81 d = 0.53, come from Blanken and colleagues' coded dataset as read in this full text, and the vault has NOT read Mazar and Zhong and cites those
Written from the fULL TEXT READ AT SOURCE, the scanned publisher copy hosted at pdf.stafforini.com, including the results section, the publication-bias analysis and the moderator table.
What our sources record
Recorded when this source was checked, figures included, with page references and quotation marks removed.
Blanken, I., van de Ven, N., & Zeelenberg, M. (2015). A Meta-Analytic Review of Moral Licensing. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41(4), 540-558. doi:10.1177/0146167215572134