Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-l4dxg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-11T18:23:19.875Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Is social psychological research really so negatively biased?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2004

Aiden P. Gregg  and
Constantine Sedikides
Aiden P. Gregg*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Southampton, Southampton, SO17 1BJ, Englandhttp://www.soton.ac.uk/~crsi/centresinformation.htmhttp://www.soton.ac.uk/~crsi/centresinformation.htm
Constantine Sedikides*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Southampton, Southampton, SO17 1BJ, Englandhttp://www.soton.ac.uk/~crsi/centresinformation.htmhttp://www.soton.ac.uk/~crsi/centresinformation.htm
*
aiden@soton.ac.uk
cs2@soton.ac.uk
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Krueger & Funder (K&F) overstate the defects of Null Hypothesis Significance Testing (NHST), and with it the magnitude of negativity bias within social psychology. We argue that replication matters more than NHST, that the pitfalls of NHST are not always or necessarily realized, and that not all biases are harmless offshoots of adaptive mental abilities.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 27 , Issue 3 , June 2004 , pp. 340 - 341
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2004