R C M van Aert
(2021).
Analyzing data of a multi-lab replication project with individual participant data meta-analysis: A tutorial. Manuscript submitted for publication.
doi: 10.31222/osf.io/9tmua
R C M van Aert, J Mulder
(2021).
Bayesian hypothesis testing and estimation under the marginalized random-effects meta-analysis model. Manuscript submitted for publication.
doi: 10.31234/osf.io/ktcq4
R C M Van Aert, M A L M Van Assen
(2021).
Correcting for publication bias in a meta-analysis with the p-uniform* method. Manuscript submitted for publication.
doi: 10.31222/osf.io/zqjr9
R C M van Aert, C H Schmid, D Svensson, D Jackson
(2021).
Study specific prediction intervals for random-effects meta-analysis. Manuscript submitted for publication.
doi:
M Schweinsberg, …, R C M van Aert, …, E L Uhlmann
(2021).
Same data, different conclusions: Radical dispersion in empirical results when independent analysts operationalize and test the same hypothesis. Manuscript submitted for publication.
doi:
M A L M van Assen, O R van den Akker, H E M Augusteijn, M Bakker, M B Nuijten, A Olsson-Collentine, A H Stoevenbelt, J M Wicherts, R C M van Aert
(2021).
The meta-plot: A graphical tool for interpreting the results of a meta-analysis. Manuscript submitted for publication.
doi:
P M Isager, R C M van Aert, S Bahník, M J Brandt, A DeSoto, R Giner-Sorolla, J I Krueger, M Perugini, I Ropovik, A E van ’t Veer, M Vranka, D Lakens
(2021).
Deciding what to replicate: A formal definition of 'replication value' and a decision model for replication study selection. Manuscript submitted for publication.
doi: 10.31222/osf.io/2gurz
R C M van Aert, H Niemeyer
(2021).
Publication bias. In S. O. Lilienfeld, W. O’Donohue, & A. Masuda. Questionable research practices in clinical psychology. Springer.
doi: 10.31222/osf.io/3rdys
H Brohmer, L V Eckerstorfer, R C M van Aert, K Corcoran
(2021).
Do behavioral observations make people catch the goal? A meta-analysis on goal contagion. International Review of Social Psychology.
doi: 10.31219/osf.io/xydgf
R R Ross, R C M van Aert, O R van den Akker, M van Elk
(2020).
How robust is the evidence for cleansing effects?. Behavioral and Brain Sciences.
doi:
E van der Meulen, P G van der Velden, R C M van Aert, M J P M van Veldhoven
(2020).
Longitudinal associations of psychological resilience with mental health and functioning among military personnel: A meta-analysis of prospective studies. Social Science & Medicine, 255.
doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.112814
H Niemeyer, R C M van Aert, S Schmid, D Uelsmann, C Knaevelsrud, O Schulte-Herbrueggen
(2020).
Publication bias in meta-analyses of posttraumatic stress disorder interventions. Meta-Psychology, 4.
doi: 10.15626/MP.2018.884
T Havránek, T D Stanley, H Doucouliagos, P Bom, J Geyer-Klingeberg, I Iwasaki, W R Reed, K Rost, R C M van Aert
(2020).
Reporting guidelines for meta-analysis in economics. Journal of Economic Surveys, 34(3), 469-475.
doi: 10.1111/joes.12363
R C M van Aert, D Jackson
(2019).
A new justification of the Hartung-Knapp method for random-effects meta-analysis based on weighted least squares regression. Research Synthesis Methods, 10(4), 515-527.
doi: 10.1002/jrsm.1356
R C M van Aert, J M Wicherts, M A L M van Assen
(2019).
Publication bias examined in meta-analyses from psychology and medicine: A meta-meta-analysis. PLOS ONE, 14(4): e0215052.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0215052
R C M van Aert, M A L M van Assen, W Viechtbauer
(2019).
Statistical properties of methods based on the Q-statistic for constructing a confidence interval for the between-study variance in meta-analysis. Research Synthesis Methods, 10(2), 225-239.
doi: 10.1002/jrsm.1336
H E M Augusteijn, R C M van Aert, M A L M van Assen
(2019).
The effect of publication bias on the Q test and assessment of heterogeneity. Psychological Methods, 24(1), 116-134.
doi: 10.1037/met0000197
R C M van Aert, M A L M van Assen
(2018).
Examining reproducibility in psychology: A hybrid method for combining a statistically significant original study and a replication. Behavior Research Methods, 50(4), 1515-1539.
doi: 10.3758/s13428-017-0967-6
R A Klein, …, R C M van Aert, …, B A Nosek
(2018).
Many Labs 2: Investigating variation in replicability across samples and settings. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 1(4), 443-490.
doi: 10.1177/2515245918810225
R C M van Aert, D Jackson
(2018).
Multistep estimators of the between-study variance: The relationship with the Paule-Mandel estimator. Statistics in Medicine, 37(17), 2616-2629.
doi: 10.1002/sim.7665
R C M van Aert, M A L M van Assen
(2017).
Bayesian evaluation of effect size after replicating an original study. PLOS ONE, 12(4): e0175302.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0175302
R C M van Aert, J M Wicherts, M A L M van Assen
(2016).
Conducting meta-analyses on p-values: Reservations and recommendations for applying p-uniform and p-curve. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 11(5), 713-729.
doi: 10.1177/1745691616650874
J M Wicherts, C L S Veldkamp, H E M Augusteijn, M Bakker, R C M van Aert, M A L M van Assen
(2016).
Degrees of freedom in planning, running, analyzing, and reporting psychological studies: A checklist to avoid p-hacking. Frontiers in Psychology, 7(1832).
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01832
C J Anderson, …, R C M van Aert, …, K Zuni
(2016).
Response to comment on “Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science”. Science, 351(6277).
doi: 10.1126/science.aad9163
L A van der Ark, R C M van Aert
(2015).
Comparing confidence intervals for Goodman and Kruskal's gamma coefficient. Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation, 85(12), 2491-2505.
doi: 10.1080/00949655.2014.932791
C H J Hartgerink, R C M van Aert, M B Nuijten, J M Wicherts, M A L M van Assen
(2015).
Distributions of p-values smaller than .05 in psychology: What is going on?. PeerJ, 4:e1935.
doi: 10.7717/peerj.1935
Open Science Collaboration
(2015).
Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349(6251).
doi: 10.1126/science.aac4716
M A L M van Assen, R C M van Aert, J M Wicherts
(2015).
Meta-analysis using effect size distributions of only statistically significant studies. Psychological Methods, 20(3), 293-309.
doi: 10.1037/met0000025
2014
M B Nuijten, M A L M van Assen, R C M van Aert, J M Wicherts
(2014).
Standard analyses fail to show that US studies overestimate effect sizes in softer research. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 111(7), 712-713.
doi: 10.1073/pnas.1322149111
M A L M van Assen, R C M van Aert, M B Nuijten, J M Wicherts
(2014).
Why publishing everything is more effective than selective publishing of statistically significant results. PLOS ONE, 9(1): e84896.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0084896