Props to @NicoleBarbaro and @TKShackelford among others for publishing this null result. I haven't read the paper, but I respect researchers who publish high quality papers that support or do not support their hypotheses. We all should.https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322527281_Do_Men_Produce_Higher-Quality_Ejaculates_When_Primed_with_Thoughts_of_Partner_Infidelity …
-
Show this thread
-
I'm all for publishing null results but 45 participants? Expecting an effect of approx. r = .45? Expecting a social prime to induce biological changes in sperm? This research is a prime example of why politicians want to defund social science.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @MerlinPsychSage @EPoe187 and
But it was within participants, which gives way more power; They had 90% power to detect effects as small as r = 0.25. A social prime is, in theory no different from any transient life experience, and life experience induces biological changes.
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @RichieEvPsych @EPoe187 and
You think telling someone to imagine your romantic partner cheated on you is no different than your partner actually cheating on you? social psych needs a dose of reality. r of .25 would indicate assuming 6% of variance in ejaculate quality is due to imagining. Give me a break.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
Re: Stimuli--great points...all of which we discuss in our paper + the multiple reasons the stimuli were used in the first place, and the obvious limitations to using written stimuli. Also, anyone that conducts research like this knows the IRB is a huge hurdle to overcome..pic.twitter.com/3ECY6VuarP
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.