Emil O W Kirkegaard

Not very convincing IMO. I remain skeptical. Tons of tiny small sample studies being cited in favor of something? With obvious commercial interests? No pre-registered large studies? This stuff is not likely to be a representative dataset of all existing data.

"The small effect in general but seems robust" <-- dangerous conclusion! This is what social psych people say all the time, only to then be disproven in big pre-reg study.

I tend to agree, but I think the priors against smallish-but robust-effects in social psych are different. In this case, we've got reasonable biological pathways, bioavailability studies, etc. The world of social psych is hellbend on armchair folk psychology causal intuitions.

And that makes me slightly more biased against accepting small but robust effects in social psychology. There are more flexible ontological moving parts that could be responsible for these effects