...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of personality and social psychology >In Defense of Diligence: A Rejoinder to Pelham and Carvallo (2011)
【24h】

In Defense of Diligence: A Rejoinder to Pelham and Carvallo (2011)

机译：捍卫勤奋：佩勒姆和卡瓦洛的重聚（2011）

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

In Simonsohn (2011) I reported the results from 14 studies that suggest all existing evidence of implicit egotism in marriage, job, and location decisions is spurious. Lack of diligence by Pelham and colleagues explains in great part why the confounds behind their findings were not addressed in time. They almost never included controls, were dismissive of blatant alternative explanations, and on occasion misreported factual information that made confounds appear less important. Their rebuttal is similarly lacking in diligence. The specific empirical concerns it raised are contradicted by evidence, logic, or both. It reported misleading examples and inaccurate facts (some regarding the authors' own data). In this rejoinder I address all specific issues they raised about the empirics of my article. I then provide perhaps the most striking example of lack of diligence in their earlier work. I close on a constructive note, providing 2 concrete suggestions on how to analyze data in future implicit egotism studies.
机译：在Simonsohn（2011）中，我报告了14项研究的结果，这些结果表明，婚姻，工作和位置决策中所有隐性自负的现有证据都是虚假的。佩勒姆（Pelham）及其同事缺乏勤奋的精神在很大程度上解释了为什么他们的发现背后的困惑没有及时得到解决。他们几乎从来没有加入过控制措施，对公然的替代性解释不屑一顾，并且有时错误报告的事实信息使混乱显得不那么重要。他们的反驳同样缺乏勤奋。它提出的具体的经验问题与证据，逻辑或两者矛盾。它报告了令人误解的例子和不准确的事实（有些关于作者自己的数据）。在本文的第二部分，我将解决他们提出的有关本文经验的所有具体问题。然后，我也许会提供他们早期工作中缺乏勤奋的最明显例子。最后，我给出了一个建设性的建议，就如何在未来的隐性自我主义研究中分析数据提供了2条具体建议。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号