Back to Search Start Over

Registered Replication Report on Mazar, Amir, and Ariely (2008)

Authors :
Verschuere, Bruno
Meijer, Ewout H.
Jim, Ariane
Hoogesteyn, Katherine
Orthey, Robin
McCarthy, Randy J.
Skowronski, John J.
Acar, Oguz A.
Aczel, Balazs
Bakos, Bence E.
Barbosa, Fernando
Baskin, Ernest
Bègue, Laurent
Ben-Shakhar, Gershon
Birt, Angie R.
Blatz, Lisa
Charman, Steve D.
Claesen, Aline
Clay, Samuel L.
Coary, Sean P.
Crusius, Jan
Evans, Jacqueline R.
Feldman, Noa
Ferreira-Santos, Fernando
Gamer, Matthias
Gomes, Sara
González-Iraizoz, Marta
Holzmeister, Felix
Huber, Juergen
Isoni, Andrea
Jessup, Ryan K.
Kirchler, Michael
klein Selle, Nathalie
Koppel, Lina
Kovacs, Marton
Laine, Tei
Lentz, Frank
Loschelder, David D.
Ludvig, Elliot A.
Lynn, Monty L.
Martin, Scott D.
McLatchie, Neil M.
Mechtel, Mario
Nahari, Galit
Özdoğru, Asil Ali
Pasion, Rita
Pennington, Charlotte R.
Roets, Arne
Rozmann, Nir
Scopelliti, Irene
Spiegelman, Eli
Suchotzki, Kristina
Sutan, Angela
Szecsi, Peter
Tinghög, Gustav
Tisserand, Jean-Christian
Tran, Ulrich S.
Van Hiel, Alain
Vanpaemel, Wolf
Västfjäll, Daniel
Verliefde, Thomas
Vezirian, Kévin
Voracek, Martin
Warmelink, Lara
Wick, Katherine
Wiggins, Bradford J.
Wylie, Keith
Yıldız, Ezgi
Source :
Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science; September 2018, Vol. 1 Issue: 3 p299-317, 19p
Publication Year :
2018

Abstract

The self-concept maintenance theory holds that many people will cheat in order to maximize self-profit, but only to the extent that they can do so while maintaining a positive self-concept. Mazar, Amir, and Ariely (2008, Experiment 1) gave participants an opportunity and incentive to cheat on a problem-solving task. Prior to that task, participants either recalled the Ten Commandments (a moral reminder) or recalled 10 books they had read in high school (a neutral task). Results were consistent with the self-concept maintenance theory. When given the opportunity to cheat, participants given the moral-reminder priming task reported solving 1.45 fewer matrices than did those given a neutral prime (Cohen’s d= 0.48); moral reminders reduced cheating. Mazar et al.’s article is among the most cited in deception research, but their Experiment 1 has not been replicated directly. This Registered Replication Report describes the aggregated result of 25 direct replications (total N= 5,786), all of which followed the same preregistered protocol. In the primary meta-analysis (19 replications, total n= 4,674), participants who were given an opportunity to cheat reported solving 0.11 more matrices if they were given a moral reminder than if they were given a neutral reminder (95% confidence interval = [−0.09, 0.31]). This small effect was numerically in the opposite direction of the effect observed in the original study (Cohen’s d= −0.04).

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
25152459 and 25152467
Volume :
1
Issue :
3
Database :
Supplemental Index
Journal :
Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science
Publication Type :
Periodical
Accession number :
ejs46509095
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245918781032