Publications

2021
    (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

    PDF OSF

    (2021). Bayesian hypothesis testing and estimation under the marginalized random-effects meta-analysis model. Manuscript submitted for publication. doi: 10.31234/osf.io/ktcq4

    PDF OSF

    (2021). Correcting for publication bias in a meta-analysis with the p-uniform* method. Manuscript submitted for publication. doi: 10.31222/osf.io/zqjr9

    PDF OSF

    (2021). Study specific prediction intervals for random-effects meta-analysis. Manuscript submitted for publication. doi:

    (2021). Same data, different conclusions: Radical dispersion in empirical results when independent analysts operationalize and test the same hypothesis. Manuscript submitted for publication. doi:

    (2021). The meta-plot: A graphical tool for interpreting the results of a meta-analysis. Manuscript submitted for publication. doi:

    (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

    PDF OSF

    (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

    PDF OSF

    (2021). Do behavioral observations make people catch the goal? A meta-analysis on goal contagionInternational Review of Social Psychology. doi: 10.31219/osf.io/xydgf

    PDF OSF

2020
    (2020). How robust is the evidence for cleansing effects?Behavioral and Brain Sciences. doi:

    (2020). Longitudinal associations of psychological resilience with mental health and functioning among military personnel: A meta-analysis of prospective studiesSocial Science & Medicine, 255. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.112814

    PDF

    (2020). Publication bias in meta-analyses of posttraumatic stress disorder interventionsMeta-Psychology, 4. doi: 10.15626/MP.2018.884

    PDF OSF

    (2020). Reporting guidelines for meta-analysis in economicsJournal of Economic Surveys, 34(3), 469-475. doi: 10.1111/joes.12363

    PDF

2019
    (2019). A new justification of the Hartung-Knapp method for random-effects meta-analysis based on weighted least squares regressionResearch Synthesis Methods, 10(4), 515-527. doi: 10.1002/jrsm.1356

    PDF OSF

    (2019). Publication bias examined in meta-analyses from psychology and medicine: A meta-meta-analysisPLOS ONE, 14(4): e0215052. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0215052

    PDF OSF

    (2019). Statistical properties of methods based on the Q-statistic for constructing a confidence interval for the between-study variance in meta-analysisResearch Synthesis Methods, 10(2), 225-239. doi: 10.1002/jrsm.1336

    PDF OSF

    (2019). The effect of publication bias on the Q test and assessment of heterogeneityPsychological Methods, 24(1), 116-134. doi: 10.1037/met0000197

    PDF OSF

2018
    (2018). Examining reproducibility in psychology: A hybrid method for combining a statistically significant original study and a replicationBehavior Research Methods, 50(4), 1515-1539. doi: 10.3758/s13428-017-0967-6

    PDF OSF

    (2018). Many Labs 2: Investigating variation in replicability across samples and settingsAdvances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 1(4), 443-490. doi: 10.1177/2515245918810225

    PDF

    (2018). Meta-analysis: Shortcomings and potentialGVO drukkers & vormgevers. doi: 10.31222/osf.io/eqhjd

    PDF

    (2018). Multistep estimators of the between-study variance: The relationship with the Paule-Mandel estimatorStatistics in Medicine, 37(17), 2616-2629. doi: 10.1002/sim.7665

    PDF OSF

2017
    (2017). Bayesian evaluation of effect size after replicating an original studyPLOS ONE, 12(4): e0175302. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0175302

    PDF OSF

2016
    (2016). Conducting meta-analyses on p-values: Reservations and recommendations for applying p-uniform and p-curvePerspectives on Psychological Science, 11(5), 713-729. doi: 10.1177/1745691616650874

    PDF Supplemental materials

    (2016). Degrees of freedom in planning, running, analyzing, and reporting psychological studies: A checklist to avoid p-hackingFrontiers in Psychology, 7(1832). doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01832

    PDF

    (2016). Response to comment on “Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science”Science, 351(6277). doi: 10.1126/science.aad9163

    PDF

2015
    (2015). Comparing confidence intervals for Goodman and Kruskal's gamma coefficientJournal of Statistical Computation and Simulation, 85(12), 2491-2505. doi: 10.1080/00949655.2014.932791

    PDF

    (2015). Distributions of p-values smaller than .05 in psychology: What is going on?PeerJ, 4:e1935. doi: 10.7717/peerj.1935

    PDF

    (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological scienceScience, 349(6251). doi: 10.1126/science.aac4716

    (2015). Meta-analysis using effect size distributions of only statistically significant studiesPsychological Methods, 20(3), 293-309. doi: 10.1037/met0000025

2014
    (2014). Standard analyses fail to show that US studies overestimate effect sizes in softer researchProc Natl Acad Sci USA, 111(7), 712-713. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1322149111

    Post-print

    (2014). Why publishing everything is more effective than selective publishing of statistically significant resultsPLOS ONE, 9(1): e84896. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0084896

    PDF