Higher agreement with more-than statements (#232)

Return to View Chart

How to Cite this Report

APA Style

Wong, Phoebe H. Evers, Ellen R. K. Nelson, Leif D.. Higher agreement with more-than statements. (2015, November 25). Retrieved 22:43, February 22, 2018 from http://www.PsychFileDrawer.org/replication.php?attempt=MjMy

MLA Style

"Higher agreement with more-than statements" Wong, Phoebe H. Evers, Ellen R. K. Nelson, Leif D.. 25 Nov 2015 12:06 22 Feb 2018, 22:43 <http://www.PsychFileDrawer.org/replication.php?attempt=MjMy>

MHRA Style

'Higher agreement with more-than statements', Wong, Phoebe H. Evers, Ellen R. K. Nelson, Leif D., , 25 November 2015 12:06 <http://www.PsychFileDrawer.org/replication.php?attempt=MjMy> [accessed 22 February 2018]

Chicago Style

"Higher agreement with more-than statements", Wong, Phoebe H. Evers, Ellen R. K. Nelson, Leif D., , http://www.PsychFileDrawer.org/replication.php?attempt=MjMy (accessed February 22, 2018)


Higher agreement with more-than statements [Internet]. Wong, Phoebe H. Evers, Ellen R. K. Nelson, Leif D.; 2015 Nov 25, 12:06 [cited 2018 Feb 22]. Available from: http://www.PsychFileDrawer.org/replication.php?attempt=MjMy

Reference to Original Report of Finding Hoorens, Vera & Bruckmüller, Susanne (2015), Less is more? Think again! A cognitive fluency-based more-less asymmetry in comparative communication. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109, 753-766
Title Higher agreement with more-than statements
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 5
Link to PDF of Original ReportView Article
Brief Statement of Original Result Hoorens & Bruckmuller (2015, Study 5) found that participants agree more with "more than" statements compared to equivalent "less than" statements (e.g., "men are more aggressive than women" vs. "women are less aggressive than men").
Type of Replication Attempted Fairly Direct Replication
Result Type Successful Replication
Difference? Same Direction, .001
Number of Subjects 172
Number of Subjects in Original Study 60
Year in which Replication Attempt was Made 2015
Name of Investigators (Real Names Required) Wong, Phoebe H. Evers, Ellen R. K. Nelson, Leif D.
Detailed Description of Method/Results Participants
Participants were 172 Amazon Mechanical Turk workers (106 males), aged 19 to 72 (M = 31.5, SD = 11.33) . Sample size was pre-determined to be roughly 2.5 times larger than the original study to ensure an 80% power of our replication (see Simonsohn, 2015).

The authors provided us with the original stimuli. The original study employed 20 comparative statements that were translated from Dutch to English by a native Dutch speaker and proofread by a native English speaker. Because of differences between the two languages, some statements had to be slightly adjusted (e.g., “mannen zijn egoistischer” was translated to “men are more egoistic”). Of these 20 statements, 5 were about typically positive female traits, 5 about typically negative female traits, 5 about positive male traits, and 5 about negative male traits.

The study used a 2 (Framing: “more than” vs. “less than”) × 2 (Stereotype-Consistency: consistent vs inconsistent) × 2 (Desirability: desirable vs undesirable) design. Framing and consistency was manipulated between-subjects while desirability was varied within. Participants were randomly assigned to one of the four conditions and asked to indicate how much they agreed with each of the 20 statements on a scale of 1 (fully disagree) to 7 (fully agree).

Results and Discussion
The main finding of the original study was a main-effect of more-than framing when comparing the average agreement with all 20 statements across conditions. We replicate the main effect of framing with the same effect size. Participants agreed more with the “more than” statements (M = 3.67, SD = 1.27) than the “less than” statements (M = 2.85, SD = 1.03; F(1, 168) = 25.82, p < .001, η2p = 0.133). Just like the original study, we also found an expected main-effect of consistency with participants agreeing more with stereotype-consistent statements (M = 3.89, SD = 1.29; F(1, 168) = 45.75, p < .001, η2p = 0.214) as compared to inconsistent statements (M = 2.76, SD = 0.89). Unlike the original study, we also found a significant interaction-effect, F(1, 168) = 5.58, p = 0.02, η2p = 0.032, such that the effect of more-than vs. less-than statements was larger in the consistent conditions as compared to the inconsistent conditions (see figure 1).
We also didn’t find an interaction effect between framing and desirability, F(1,170) = 0.013, p = 0.91, η2p = 0.000. For the desirable items, people still agreed more with more-than statements (M = 3.60, SD = 1.20) as compared to less-than statements (M = 2.77, SD = 1.02). For the undesirable items, people also agreed more with more-than statements (M = 3.74, SD = 1.38) as compared to less-than statements (M = 2.92, SD = 1.09).

Replication-data can be downloaded from: https://sites.google.com/site/erkevers/home

Any Known Methodological Differences
(between original and present study)?
*The original study was a pencil and paper study, our study was conducted online. *The original study used Belgian participants, ours were American. *The original study used statements presented in Dutch, we used statements presented in English.
Email of Investigator
Name of individuals who
actually carried out the project
Phoebe Wong conducted the study Phoebe Wong and Ellen Evers analyzed the data
Location of ProjectOnline - Amazon Mechanical Turk
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 The effect-sizes of the original paper and our replication are very similar. *The original paper reported a partial eta squared of framing of 0.14, we find an eta squared of 0.14 as well. *The original effect of consistency is .49 in the original study while it is .21 in our replication. *The original study does not find an interaction between consistency and framing (p = .49, partial eta squared is .01), we do; p = .02, partial eta squared is .03.
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