Registered Replication Report: Dijksterhuis and van Knippenberg
This is the coordinated multi-laboratory test of one of behavioural priming's showpiece findings, the claim that people asked to think about professors before a general knowledge quiz answer more questions correctly than people asked to think about football hooligans. The original reported a difference of thirteen per cent. The original authors' own later attempts produced two to three per cent, and only among men. Forty laboratories collected data for this project and twenty-three met every inclusion condition, giving a combined sample of around four and a half thousand people, all following a protocol agreed and registered in advance. The difference between the two priming conditions was essentially zero, and there was no difference between men and women. Including every laboratory that took part, more than six thousand participants, changes nothing. This is the strongest single piece of evidence against the professor priming effect, and this vault cites it whenever the study is repeated as fact.
This is the coordinated multi-laboratory test of one of behavioural priming's showpiece findings, the claim that people asked to think about professors before a general knowledge quiz answer more questions correctly than people asked to think about football hooligans. The original reported a difference of thirteen per cent. The original authors' own later attempts produced two to three per cent, and only among men. Forty laboratories collected data for this project and twenty-three met every inclusion condition, giving a combined sample of around four and a half thousand people, all following a protocol agreed and registered in advance. The difference between the two priming conditions was essentially zero, and there was no difference between men and women. Including every laboratory that took part, more than six thousand participants, changes nothing. This is the strongest single piece of evidence against the professor priming effect, and this vault cites it whenever the study is repeated as fact.
Written from the abstract, OpenAlex.
What our sources record
Reproduced as it was written when this source was checked, figures and all.
O'Donnell, M., Nelson, L. D., Ackermann, E., et al. (2018). "Registered replication report: Dijksterhuis and van Knippenberg (1998)." Perspectives on Psychological Science, 13(2), 268-294. 23 labs, N = 4,493, run on the original authors' preferred protocol; effect 0.14%, 95% CI [-0.71%, 1%].
Where we use it
- What Forty-One Participants Buys, Why We Look
Reliability of this reference
The link below was matched against the publisher's record on title, first author and year, and all three agree.
The source
https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691618755704
DOI: 10.1177/1745691618755704