Explore the vast range of titles available.

Interpreting a failure to replicate is complicated by the fact that the failure could be due to the original finding being a false positive, unrecognized moderating influences between the original and replication procedures, or faulty implementation of the procedures in the replication. One strategy to maximize replication quality is involving the original authors in study design. We (N = 17 Labs and N = 1,550 participants, after exclusions) experimentally tested whether original author involvement improved replicability of a classic finding from Terror Management Theory (Greenberg et al., 1994). Our results were non-diagnostic of whether original author involvement improves replicability because we were unable to replicate the finding under any conditions. This suggests that the original finding was either a false positive or the conditions necessary to obtain it are not fully understood or no longer exist. Data, materials, analysis code, preregistration, and supplementary documents can be found on the OSF page: https://osf.io/8ccnw/

Mindfulness and acceptance-based approaches have shown promise as alternative interventions to trauma-focused therapies for PTSD. This open trial examined the potential effectiveness of an 8-session Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) group in reducing psychiatric symptoms and improving quality of life in outpatient adults (N = 86, 79% female) receiving treatment for PTSD in a health maintenance organization (HMO) psychiatry clinic. The group therapy was an adjunct to usual care and utilized the six core processes of ACT: acceptance, cognitive defusion, mindfulness, self-as-context, values, and committed action. Participants completed self-report measures of PTSD symptoms, depression, anxiety and quality of life; and self-report ACT-specific process measures of acceptance, cognitive defusion and mindfulness at pretreatment, posttreatment and 3-month follow-up. Repeated measures analyses of variance conducted with a completer sample (n = 55) demonstrated significant improvements on all variables with medium to large effect sizes at posttreatment and follow-up. The study findings support further investigation in a randomized controlled trial.

The present study presents the results of a collaborative registered replication of Griskevicius et al. (2010, Experiment 1). As part of the Collaborative Replication and Education Project, 24 student groups from six countries (N = 3,774) investigated whether pro-environmental behavior can be promoted by priming status motives (desires for social status and prestige). This large, multi-site replication showed no evidence to support the hypothesis that hypothetical pro-environmental behavior can be stimulated by having participants read a story designed to prime status motives. We performed several exploratory analyses to investigate whether extension variables (i.e., equating “green” choices with prosocial behavior, political beliefs, sampling methods, location, duration of data collection, and gender) moderated the hypothesized effect of status motives on pro-environmental choices, but these analyses produced null results. One limitation of the study is that most data collection sites did not include a manipulation check, and the one site that did found a much weaker effect (d = 0.32) than the extremely large effect originally reported (d = 3.69). As a result, it remains unclear whether the null result reflects a failure of this specific priming method or a challenge to the underlying theory.

Gilbert et al . conclude that evidence from the Open Science Collaboration’s Reproducibility Project: Psychology indicates high reproducibility, given the study methodology. Their very optimistic assessment is limited by statistical misconceptions and by causal inferences from selectively interpreted, correlational data. Using the Reproducibility Project: Psychology data, both optimistic and pessimistic conclusions about reproducibility are possible, and neither are yet warranted.

William James's pluralism, when combined with his pragmatism and radical empiricism, is a complete and coherent philosophy of life. James provides an antidote to the excesses of both the extreme realist/objectivist and the extreme constructivist/relativist camps. In this paper, we demonstrate how this is so in a discussion of epistemology and ontology including several extended examples. These examples demonstrate the inescapability of context and background assumptions and the advantages of a pluralist worldview.