Search

Over the past few years, more attention has been paid to jingle and jangle fallacies in psychological science. Jingle fallacies arise when two or more distinct psychological phenomena are erroneously labeled with the same term, while jangle fallacies occur when different terms are used to describe the same phenomenon. Jingle and jangle fallacies emerge due to the vague linkage between psychological theories and their practical implementation in empirical studies, compounded by variations in study designs, methodologies, and applying different statistical procedures' algorithms. Despite progress in organizing scientific findings via systematic reviews and meta-analyses, effective strategies to prevent these fallacies are still lacking. This paper explores the integration of several approaches with the potential to identify and mitigate jingle and jangle fallacies within psychological science. Essentially, organizing studies according to their specifications, which include theoretical background, methods, study designs, and results, alongside a combinatorial algorithm and flexible inclusion criteria, may indeed represent a feasible approach. A jinglefallacy detector arises when identical specifications lead to disparate outcomes, whereas jangle-fallacy indicators could operate on the premise that varying specifications consistently yield overrandomly similar results. We discuss the role of advanced computational technologies, such as Natural Language Processing (NLP), in identifying these fallacies. In conclusion, addressing jingle and jangle fallacies requires a comprehensive approach that considers all levels and phases of psychological science. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Physical activity is a health-relevant lifestyle factor associated with various benefits on physical and mental health. Several meta-analyses indicated effects of acute and chronic physical activities on elementary cognitive functions such as executive control processes, memory, and attention. Meta-analytic evidence on the effects of physical activity on creative idea generation, which involves a conglomerate of these elementary cognitive functions, is largely missing. Objective: A twofold approach was used to evaluate (1) if there is an association between habitual physical activity and creative ideation and (2) if physical activity interventions (acute and chronic) enhance creative ideation performance. Methods: Multilevel meta-analytic methods were applied to (1) evaluate the cross-sectional association between creative ideation performance and measures of habitual physical activity and (2) the effect of physical activity on creative ideation performance. Indicators of creative ideation (fluency, flexibility, originality, elaboration, or composite score), creativity domain (verbal, figural), population (adults, children), gender, study quality, and publication year served as moderator variables for both meta-analyses. Analyses of intervention studies additionally examined the moderator variables study design (between, within), time of measurement (during, after), and implementation of intervention (acute, chronic). Results: The applied meta-analytic multilevel analysis indicated a medium effect for cross-sectional studies (r = 0.22, SE = 0.06, p = 0.002, 95% CI [0.10–0.34]) based on 17 effects sizes from seven studies. The pooled effects of 28 intervention studies, providing 115 effect sizes, indicated a medium effect size of Hedges' g = 0.47 (SE = 0.09, p < 0.001, 95% CI [0.30–0.65]). Furthermore, a stronger effect was observed for chronic interventions of several days or weeks in comparison with acute interventions of one single bout. Conclusion: This study adds important new meta-analytic evidence on the beneficial role of physical activity beyond mental and physical health outcomes: Physical activity has a positive impact on creative ideation, which expands the literature on the role of physical activity in more elementary cognitive functions such as executive control, memory, and attention. Moderator analyses suggested that chronic interventions showed stronger effects than single bouts of physical activity. Rigorously conducted randomized controlled intervention studies and more cross-sectional studies are needed to broaden the evidence in this nascent field of research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

According to family systems theory, a family is regarded as an organized whole and relations within this system are interconnected. However, it is not clear to date whether the interparental and the sibling relationship are associated and, if such an association exists, whether it is positive or negative. Previous findings on the associations between the interparental and sibling relationships are inconsistent and there is as yet no pertinent review or meta-analysis. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis set out (1) to aggregate previous studies investigating the links between the interparental and sibling relationships and (2) to examine potential moderators in this link. Based on 47 studies reporting 234 effect sizes (N = 29,746 from six nations; 6–12 years; 49% boys), meta-analytic results suggest a small positive correlation between interparental and sibling relationship quality (r =.14). Only the percentage of male children in the sample moderated this effect. Sex composition of sibling dyad and source of publication affected whether positive or negative associations were found. The findings support a growing consensus that family relations do not function in isolation, but are mutually interdependent, which should be considered in clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Till et al. (2016) reported that in an Austrian sample approximately one in ten respondents incorrectly believed that Austria still practices, or recently practiced, the death penalty, and that there is a positive association between the amount of weekly television viewing and this gross misperception of the Austrian justice system. Methods: An endorsed, prereviewed, preregistered close (N = 597) served to test the veracity of these reported effects. This was coupled with the conceptual extension part, which (a) investigated the potential influence of watching American crime series, (b) accounted for further possible confounds, and (c) tested the generalizability of the effect of television viewing to online streaming. Results: Online survey data (N = 597) replicated the one-in-ten prevalence of incorrect answers with the 5-item death penalty questionnaire used in the original study, but not, when asking directly about Austria's death penalty practices (prevalence: 0.3%). Younger age, but not the amount of television viewing or online streaming, suggestibility, or preferred TV genre consistently predicted incorrect answers in the death penalty questionnaire. Incorrect answers were Mokken-scalable (i.e., formed a common scale, complying with a non-parametric item response model) and were highly consistent. In contrast to the replication study results, a small meta-analysis of all available evidence (three studies, including the present replication) suggested that the aggregate effect of television viewing nominally was significant, albeit small. Conclusion: The replication study yielded mixed results, which indicate the perception of a high prevalence of beliefs that there is capital punishment in a country without death penalty probably is due to a faultily designed questionnaire and thus a research artifact. Also, positive associations of television viewing with such beliefs likely are only small at best. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In the treatment of PTSD, meta-analyses suggest comparable efficacy of cognitive behavioural therapies and various trauma focused treatments, but results for other treatments are inconsistent. One meta-analysis found no differences for bona fide therapies, but was critizised for overgeneralization and a biased study sample and relied on an omnibus test of overall effect size heterogeneity that is not widely used. Methods: We present an updated meta-analysis on bona fide psychotherapies for PTSD, contrasting an improved application of the omnibus test of overall effect size heterogeneity with conventional random-effects meta-analyses of specified treatment types against all others. Twenty-two studies were eligible, reporting 24 head-to-head comparisons in randomized controlled trials of 1694 patients. Results: Head-to-head comparison between trauma focused and non-trauma focused treatments revealed a small relative advantage for trauma focused treatments at post-treatment (Hedges' g = 0.14) and at two follow-ups (g = 0.17, g = 0.23) regarding PTSD symptom severity. Controlling and adjusting for influential studies and publication bias, prolonged exposure and exposure therapies (g = 0.19) were slightly more efficacious than other therapies regarding PTSD symptom severity at post-treatment; prolonged exposure had also higher recovery rates (RR = 1.26). Present-centered therapies were slightly less efficacious regarding symptom severity at post-treatment (g = -0.20) and at follow-up (g = -0.17), but equally efficacious as available comparison treatments with regards to secondary outcomes. The improved omnibus test confirmed overall effect size heterogeneity. Conclusions: Trauma focused treatments, prolonged exposure and exposure therapies were slightly more efficacious than other therapies in the treatment of PTSD. However, treatment differences were at most small and far below proposed thresholds of clinically meaningful differences. Previous null findings may have stemmed from not clearly differentiating primary and secondary outcomes, but also from a specific use of the omnibus test of overall effect size heterogeneity that appears to be prone to error. However, more high-quality studies using ITT analyses are still needed to draw firm conclusions. Moreover, the PTSD treatment field may need to move beyond a focus primarily on efficacy so as to address other important issues such as public health issues and the requirements of highly vulnerable populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research from various countries consistently reported an advantage of boys over girls in general knowledge and was also suggestive of some overall trends regarding specific domains of general knowledge that were speculated to stem from biologically differentiated interests. However, results were heterogeneous and, as of yet, had not been evaluated meta-analytically. Moreover, previous research drew on overly homogeneous high-school or undergraduate samples whose representativeness appears problematic; mostly, likely moderators, such as school type, student age or parental education, were also not directly investigated or controlled for. We provide a meta-analytical aggregation of available results regarding sex differences in general knowledge and present new data, investigating the psychometric properties of the General Knowledge Test (GKT), on which previous research primarily relied, and explored sex differences in a large and heterogeneous Austrian high-school student sample (N = 1088). The aggregated sex effect in general knowledge was of medium size in previous research, but differences in specific domains were heterogeneous across countries and only modest at best. Large sex differences in our data could be explained to a large part by school-related moderators (school type, school, student age, parental education) and selection processes. Boys had a remaining advantage over girls that was only small in size and that was consistent with the magnitude of sex differences in general intelligence. Analysis of the GKT yielded no evidence of biologically differentiated interests, but of a specific interest in the humanities among girls. In conclusion, previous research likely overestimated sex differences in general knowledge. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Despite numerous investigations, the question whether all bona fide treatments of depression are equally efficacious in adults has not been sufficiently answered. Method: We applied two different meta-analytical techniques (conventional meta-analysis and mixed treatment comparisons). Overall, 53 studies with 3,965 patients, which directly compared two or more bona fide psychotherapies in a randomized trial, were included. Meta-analyses were conducted regarding five different types of outcome measures. Additionally, the influence of possible moderators was examined. Results: Direct comparisons of cognitive behavior therapy, behavior activation therapy, psychodynamic therapy, interpersonal therapy, and supportive therapies versus all other respective treatments indicated that at the end of treatment all treatments but supportive therapies were equally efficacious whereas there was some evidence that supportive therapies were somewhat less efficacious than all other treatments according to patient self-ratings and clinical significance. At follow-up no significant differences were present. Age, gender, comorbid mental disorders, and length of therapy session were found to moderate efficacy. Cognitive behavior therapy was superior in studies where therapy sessions lasted 90 minutes or longer, behavior activation therapy was more efficacious when therapy sessions lasted less than 90 minutes. Mixed treatment comparisons indicated no statistically significant differences in treatment efficacy but some interesting trends. Conclusions: This study suggests that there might be differential effects of bona fide psychotherapies which should be examined in detail. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]