Completing Categories Fosters Feelings of Progress (#200)

Return to View Chart

How to Cite this Report

APA Style

Hannah Perfecto, Leif D. Nelson. Completing Categories Fosters Feelings of Progress. (2014, September 01). Retrieved 08:29, March 25, 2017 from http://www.PsychFileDrawer.org/replication.php?attempt=MjAw

MLA Style

"Completing Categories Fosters Feelings of Progress" Hannah Perfecto, Leif D. Nelson. 01 Sep 2014 16:05 25 Mar 2017, 08:29 <http://www.PsychFileDrawer.org/replication.php?attempt=MjAw>

MHRA Style

'Completing Categories Fosters Feelings of Progress', Hannah Perfecto, Leif D. Nelson, , 01 September 2014 16:05 <http://www.PsychFileDrawer.org/replication.php?attempt=MjAw> [accessed 25 March 2017]

Chicago Style

"Completing Categories Fosters Feelings of Progress", Hannah Perfecto, Leif D. Nelson, , http://www.PsychFileDrawer.org/replication.php?attempt=MjAw (accessed March 25, 2017)

CBE/CSE Style

Completing Categories Fosters Feelings of Progress [Internet]. Hannah Perfecto, Leif D. Nelson; 2014 Sep 01, 16:05 [cited 2017 Mar 25]. Available from: http://www.PsychFileDrawer.org/replication.php?attempt=MjAw

Reference to Original Report of Finding Shah, A. K. & Alter, A. L. (in press, 2014). Consuming experiential categories. Journal of Consumer Research.
Title Completing Categories Fosters Feelings of Progress
If the original article contained multiple experiments, which one did you attempt to replicate? e.g., you might respond 'Study 1' or 'Experiment 4'. Study 3
Link to PDF of Original ReportView Article
Brief Statement of Original Result 2(valence: good or bad) x 2(category completion: possible or impossible) between-subjects design. When a series of tasks is unpleasant, completing a sub-category in the series is appealing, to make the series feel closer to completion.
Type of Replication Attempted Highly Direct Replication
Result Type Successful Replication
Difference? Same Direction, .00002
Number of Subjects 329
Number of Subjects in Original Study 127
Year in which Replication Attempt was Made 2014
Name of Investigators (Real Names Required) Hannah Perfecto, Leif D. Nelson
Detailed Description of Method/Results Participants learned part of their job involved making several trips to Ecuador and Peru, and that they had already made 3 to Ecuador and 1 to Peru (counterbalanced). They were randomly assigned to further learn that they either enjoyed or did not enjoy the trip, and that they either had to make 4 trips to each country (category completion possible) or 10 (impossible). Lastly, they were asked to which country they would like to travel next.

The authors hypothesize completing a sub-category (e.g., all the Peru trips) fosters a greater feeling of progress through the super-ordinate task (i.e., all the business trips) than having progress in multiple sub-categories. Hence participants should prefer to travel to Ecuador (in the above example, to make 4 trips) when the trips are not enjoyable and when only 4 are required. When the trips are positive or completion of the category is impossible (the 10-trips conditions), this preference should be diminished. Both we and the authors find this interaction effect, with similar levels of significance.

We also included an attention check, asking participants how many trips they were required to take to Ecuador. Excluding the 46 (14%) who failed this check did not meaningfully affect the results, and in fact strengthened the critical interaction effect.

Figure 1 is a bar graph depicting the percentage of participants who chose to visit the more-visited country (e.g., Ecuador, above) in each condition for the original, replication, and replication excluding those who failed the attention check.
Any Known Methodological Differences
(between original and present study)?
To our knowledge, no methodological differences exist, aside from sample size: the original authors generously included their basic materials in an appendix and a detailed description for how they were modified in Study 3 in the study's method. We employed these materials to the best of our ability.
Email of Investigator
Name of individuals who
actually carried out the project
H.P. created and posted the survey online. H.P. and L.D.N. analyzed the data.
Location of ProjectUC Berkeley (online, MTurk)
Characteristics of Subjects
(subject pool, paid, etc.)
Adults tested through internet
Where did these subjects reside?United States
Was this a Class Project?No
Further Details of Results as pdf PDF

Additional Comments
Email of Original Investigator
Quantitive Information
I have complied with ethical standards for experimentation on human beings and, if necessary, have obtained appropriate permission from an Institutional Review Board or other oversight group.
TAG: Attention TAG: JDM TAG: Language TAG: Learning TAG: Memory TAG: Perception TAG: Performance TAG: Problem Solving TAG: Social Cognition TAG: Social Psychology TAG: Thinking

Are you posting an unpublished replication attempt that you conducted yourself, or noting a published replication attempt?

Post Unpublished
Post Published