Search

Your search keyword '"Arrow, Holly"' showing total 10 results
Start Over Author "Arrow, Holly" Search Limiters Available in Library Collection
10 results on '"Arrow, Holly"'

1. Many Labs 5: Testing Pre-Data-Collection Peer Review as an Intervention to Increase Replicability

Author

Ebersole, Charles R, Mathur, Maya B, Baranski, Erica, Bart-Plange, Diane-Jo, Buttrick, Nicholas R, Chartier, Christopher R, Corker, Katherine S, Corley, Martin, Hartshorne, Joshua K, IJzerman, Hans, Lazarević, Ljiljana B, Rabagliati, Hugh, Ropovik, Ivan, Aczel, Balazs, Aeschbach, Lena F, Andrighetto, Luca, Arnal, Jack D, Arrow, Holly, Babincak, Peter, Bakos, Bence E, Baník, Gabriel, Baskin, Ernest, Belopavlović, Radomir, Bernstein, Michael H, Białek, Michał, Bloxsom, Nicholas G, Bodroža, Bojana, Bonfiglio, Diane BV, Boucher, Leanne, Brühlmann, Florian, Brumbaugh, Claudia C, Casini, Erica, Chen, Yiling, Chiorri, Carlo, Chopik, William J, Christ, Oliver, Ciunci, Antonia M, Claypool, Heather M, Coary, Sean, Čolić, Marija V, Collins, W Matthew, Curran, Paul G, Day, Chris R, Dering, Benjamin, Dreber, Anna, Edlund, John E, Falcão, Filipe, Fedor, Anna, Feinberg, Lily, Ferguson, Ian R, Ford, Máire, Frank, Michael C, Fryberger, Emily, Garinther, Alexander, Gawryluk, Katarzyna, Ashbaugh, Kayla, Giacomantonio, Mauro, Giessner, Steffen R, Grahe, Jon E, Guadagno, Rosanna E, Hałasa, Ewa, Hancock, Peter JB, Hilliard, Rias A, Hüffmeier, Joachim, Hughes, Sean, Idzikowska, Katarzyna, Inzlicht, Michael, Jern, Alan, Jiménez-Leal, William, Johannesson, Magnus, Joy-Gaba, Jennifer A, Kauff, Mathias, Kellier, Danielle J, Kessinger, Grecia, Kidwell, Mallory C, Kimbrough, Amanda M, King, Josiah PJ, Kolb, Vanessa S, Kołodziej, Sabina, Kovacs, Marton, Krasuska, Karolina, Kraus, Sue, Krueger, Lacy E, Kuchno, Katarzyna, Lage, Caio Ambrosio, Langford, Eleanor V, Levitan, Carmel A, de Lima, Tiago Jessé Souza, Lin, Hause, Lins, Samuel, Loy, Jia E, Manfredi, Dylan, Markiewicz, Łukasz, Menon, Madhavi, Mercier, Brett, Metzger, Mitchell, Meyet, Venus, Millen, Ailsa E, Miller, Jeremy K, and Montealegre, Andres

Subjects
Psychology, Cognitive and Computational Psychology, Applied and Developmental Psychology, Behavioral and Social Science, replication, reproducibility, metascience, peer review, Registered Reports, open data, preregistered, Applied and developmental psychology, Cognitive and computational psychology
Abstract

Replication studies in psychological science sometimes fail to reproduce prior findings. If these studies use methods that are unfaithful to the original study or ineffective in eliciting the phenomenon of interest, then a failure to replicate may be a failure of the protocol rather than a challenge to the original finding. Formal pre-data-collection peer review by experts may address shortcomings and increase replicability rates. We selected 10 replication studies from the Reproducibility Project: Psychology (RP:P; Open Science Collaboration, 2015) for which the original authors had expressed concerns about the replication designs before data collection; only one of these studies had yielded a statistically significant effect (p

Published
2020

6. How Heavy Lifting Lightens Our Lives: Content Analysis of Perceived Outcomes of Masters Weightlifting

Author

Huebner, Marianne, Arrow, Holly, Garinther, Alex, and Meltzer, David E.

Subjects
General Medicine
Abstract

Although the benefits of sport participation for older adults has been well-documented, the traditionally masculine sport of weightlifting has only recently become popular among older women, who now participate at rates comparable to men in the United States. This study describes the self-reported effects of participating in Masters-level Olympic weightlifting on other aspects of life. Contrasting with previous studies of Masters athletes in other sports, the gender balance and broad age range of our sample allowed us to explore whether the self-reported impact of sport on older adults was similar or different across age groups (35–44, 45–59, 60, and older) for both men and women. A total of 352 (191 women, 159 men, 2 other) who completed a survey of Masters lifters registered with the United States national organization (USAW) responded to an open-ended question about how weightlifting has affected other aspects of their life. Across gender and age categories, responses indicated that weightlifting has a positive impact on physical health (strength, mobility, fitness) and on psychological (mental health benefits, stress reduction) and social aspects such as community connections. Female lifters mentioned psychological benefits such as increased confidence and help with stress and depression more commonly than male lifters; older lifters were more likely than middle-aged lifters to mention physical health benefits. Competition was a prominent theme across genders and age groups. The themes mentioned by participants are consistent with previous literature on sports that are less strongly gender-typed than weightlifting.

Published
2021

9. Many Labs 5:Registered Replication of Albarracín et al. (2008), Experiment 5

Author

Chartier, Christopher R., Arnal, Jack D., Arrow, Holly, Bloxsom, Nicholas G., Bonfiglio, Diane B.V., Brumbaugh, Claudia C., Corker, Katherine S., Ebersole, Charles R., Garinther, Alexander, Giessner, Steffen R., Hughes, Sean, Inzlicht, Michael, Lin, Hause, Mercier, Brett, Metzger, Mitchell, Rangel, Derek, Saunders, Blair, Schmidt, Kathleen, Storage, Daniel, Tocco, Carly, Chartier, Christopher R., Arnal, Jack D., Arrow, Holly, Bloxsom, Nicholas G., Bonfiglio, Diane B.V., Brumbaugh, Claudia C., Corker, Katherine S., Ebersole, Charles R., Garinther, Alexander, Giessner, Steffen R., Hughes, Sean, Inzlicht, Michael, Lin, Hause, Mercier, Brett, Metzger, Mitchell, Rangel, Derek, Saunders, Blair, Schmidt, Kathleen, Storage, Daniel, and Tocco, Carly

Abstract

In Experiment 5 of Albarracín et al. (2008), participants primed with words associated with action performed better on a subsequent cognitive task than did participants primed with words associated with inaction. A direct replication attempt by Frank, Kim, and Lee (2016) as part of the Reproducibility Project: Psychology (RP:P) failed to find evidence for this effect. In this article, we discuss several potential explanations for these discrepant findings: the source of participants (Amazon’s Mechanical Turk vs. traditional undergraduate-student pool), the setting of participation (online vs. in lab), and the possible moderating role of affect. We tested Albarracín et al.’s original hypothesis in two new samples: For the first sample, we followed the protocol developed by Frank et al. and recruited participants via Amazon’s Mechanical Turk (n = 580). For the second sample, we used a revised protocol incorporating feedback from the original authors and recruited participants from eight universities (n = 884). We did not detect moderation by protocol; patterns in the revised protocol resembled those in our implementation of the RP:P protocol, but the estimate of the focal effect size was smaller than that found originally by Albarracín et al. and larger than that found in Frank et al.’s replication attempt. We discuss these findings and possible explanations.

Published
2020

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results