Many Labs 2: Investigating Variation in Replicability Across Samples and Settings
Richard Klein; Michelangelo Vianello; Fred Hasselman; Byron G. Adams; Reginald B. Adams; Sinan Alper; Mark Aveyard; Jordan Axt · 2018 · Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science
WASTE classifies this as Negative / Null Result Report · AI classification, approximate
The study found no significant effect — useful as a negative control or null benchmark for your own design.
Abstract (excerpt)
We conducted preregistered replications of 28 classic and contemporary published findings, with protocols that were peer reviewed in advance, to examine variation in effect magnitudes across samples and settings. Each protocol was…
Excerpt shown for reference under fair use — read the full paper at the publisher.
About to run something similar?
Run an AI Precheck on your own design to catch failure modes like this one before you spend the time. Your first desk check is free.
Related failures
Investigating Variation in Replicability
Failed Experiment ReportGetting Ahead in the Communist Party: Explaining the Advancement of Central Committee Members in China
Negative / Null Result ReportReducing implicit racial preferences: II. Intervention effectiveness across time.
Negative / Null Result ReportTHE IMPACT OF IMMIGRATION ON THE STRUCTURE OF WAGES: THEORY AND EVIDENCE FROM BRITAIN
Negative / Null Result ReportRevisiting the Marshmallow Test: A Conceptual Replication Investigating Links Between Early Delay of Gratification and Later Outcomes
Negative / Null Result ReportChanging Work and Work-Family Conflict
WASTE indexes this work — it does not host or republish it. Failure-type classification is automated and approximate.
Metadata source: OpenAlex · DOI 10.1177/2515245918810225