scholarly journals Warning ‘Don't spread’ versus ‘Don't be a spreader’ to prevent the COVID-19 pandemic

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (9) ◽  
pp. 200793
Author(s):  
Fumiya Yonemitsu ◽  
Ayumi Ikeda ◽  
Naoto Yoshimura ◽  
Kaito Takashima ◽  
Yuki Mori ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Social Cognition ◽  
Data Collection ◽  
Effect Size ◽  
Infection Prevention ◽  
Ministry Of Health ◽  
Self Identity ◽  
Data Collection And Analysis ◽  
Stage 1 ◽  
Post Hoc ◽  
Better Than

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak is threatening not only health but also life worldwide. It is important to encourage citizens to voluntarily practise infection-prevention (IP) behaviours such as social distancing and self-restraint. Previous research on social cognition suggested that emphasizing self-identity is key to changing a person's behaviour. The present study investigated whether reminders that highlight self-identity would be effective in changing intention and behaviour related to the COVID-19 outbreak, and hypothesized that those who read reminders highlighting self-identity (Don't be a spreader) would change IP intention and behaviour better than those who read ‘Don't spread’ or no reminder. We conducted a two-wave survey of the same participants with a one-week interval, during which we assigned one of three reminder conditions to the participants: ‘Don't spread’ (spreading condition), ‘Don't be a spreader’ (spreader condition) and no reminder (control condition). Participants marked their responses to IP intentions and actual behaviours each week based on the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare guidelines. While the results did not show significant differences between the conditions, the post hoc analyses showed significant equivalence in either IP intentions or behavioural scores. We discussed the results from the perspective of the effect size, ceiling effects and ways of manipulation checks as future methods with more effective persuasive messaging. Following in-principle acceptance, the approved Stage 1 version of this manuscript was pre-registered on the OSF at https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/KZ5Y4. This pre-registration was performed prior to data collection and analysis.

scholarly journals Warning “Don’t spread” vs. “Don’t be a spreader” to prevent the COVID-19 pandemic

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fumiya Yonemitsu ◽  
Ayumi Ikeda ◽  
Naoto Yoshimura ◽  
Kaito Takashima ◽  
Yuki Mori ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Social Cognition ◽  
Data Collection ◽  
Effect Size ◽  
Infection Prevention ◽  
Ministry Of Health ◽  
Self Identity ◽  
Data Collection And Analysis ◽  
Stage 1 ◽  
Post Hoc ◽  
Better Than

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak is threatening not only health but also life worldwide. It is important to encourage citizens to voluntarily practise infection prevention (IP) behaviours such as social distancing and self-restraint. Previous research on social cognition suggested that emphasising self-identity is key to changing a person’s behaviour. The present study investigated whether reminders that highlight self-identity would be effective in changing intention and behaviour related to the COVID-19 outbreak, and hypothesised that those who read reminders highlighting self-identity (‘Don’t be a spreader’) would change IP intention and behaviour better than those who read ‘Don’t spread’ or no reminder. We conducted a two-wave survey of the same participants with a one-week interval, during which we assigned one of three reminder conditions to the participants: ‘Don’t spread’ (spreading condition), ‘Don’t be a spreader’ (spreader condition), and no reminder (control condition). Participants marked their responses to IP intentions and actual behaviours each week based on the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare guidelines. While the results did not show significant differences between the conditions, the post-hoc analyses showed significant equivalence in either IP intentions or behavioural scores. We discussed the results from the perspective of the effect size, ceiling effects, and ways of manipulation checks as future methods with more effective persuasive messaging. Following in-principle acceptance, the approved Stage 1 version of this manuscript was preregistered on the OSF at https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/KZ5Y4. This preregistration was performed prior to data collection and analysis.

scholarly journals Moving Sport and Exercise Science Forward: A Call for the Adoption of More Transparent Research Practices

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aaron R Caldwell ◽  
Andrew David Vigotsky ◽  
Greg Nuckols ◽  
Ian Boardley ◽  
Julia Schmidt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Data Collection ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Exercise Science ◽  
Research Practices ◽  
Questionable Research Practices ◽  
Data Collection And Analysis ◽  
Primary Means ◽  
Sport And Exercise ◽  
Stage 1

The primary means for disseminating sport and exercise science research is currently through journal articles. However, not all studies, especially those with null findings, make it to formal publication. This publication bias towards positive findings may contribute to questionable research practices. Preregistration is a solution to prevent the publication of distorted evidence resulting from this system. This process asks authors to register their hypotheses and methods before data collection on a publicly available repository or by submitting a Registered Report. In the Registered Reports format, authors submit a Stage 1 manuscript to a participating journal that includes an introduction, methods, and any pilot data indicating the exploratory or confirmatory nature of the study. After a Stage 1 peer review, the manuscript can then be offered in-principle acceptance, rejected, or sent back for revisions to improve the quality of the study. If accepted, the project is guaranteed publication, assuming the authors follow the data collection and analysis protocol. After data collection, authors re-submit a Stage 2 manuscript that includes the results and discussion, and the study is evaluated on clarity and conformity with the planned analysis. In its final form, Registered Reports appear almost identical to a typical publication, but give readers confidence that the hypotheses and main analyses are less susceptible to bias from questionable research practices. From this perspective, we argue that inclusion of Registered Reports by researchers and journals will improve the transparency, replicability, and trust in sport and exercise science research.

In Defense of HARKing

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 73-80 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey B. Vancouver
Keyword(s):  
Data Collection ◽  
Effect Size ◽  
Task Force ◽  
Theory Testing ◽  
Complex Task ◽  
Research Practice ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Post Hoc

Science is a complex task. It involves the creation and dissemination of knowledge. The creation of knowledge requires identifying and abstracting patterns (i.e., identifying phenomena and theorizing about the processes that bring it about), as well as systematically observing to better see and quantify the patterns (e.g., effect size estimating) or assess the validity of the abstractions used to explain the patterns (i.e., theory testing). To help (a) hone in on what observations would be useful and (b) communicate what the patterns mean, we are encouraged to develop and report hypotheses. That is, strategically, hypotheses facilitate the planning of data collection by helping the researcher understand what patterns need to be observed to assess the merit of an explanation. Meanwhile, tactically, hypotheses help focus the audience on the crucial patterns needed to answer a question or test a theory. When the strategic hypotheses are not supported, it raises a question regarding what to do tactically. Depending on the result (i.e., different direction; null), one might construct a hypothesis to facilitate dissemination without reporting this post hoc construction or remove mention of a hypothesis altogether. This practice is called HARKing (i.e., hypothesizing after results are known). HARKing has been so disparaged as to be considered a “detrimental research practice” (Grand et al., 2018, p. 6). As such, the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology's (SIOP) Robust and Reliability Science task force appears to be recommending that HARKing not be taught by educators, encouraged by reviewers or editors, or practiced by authors. I do not agree with those recommendations, and I elaborate on my position below.

A COMPARISON OF METHODOLOGIES FOR UNCOVERING THE STRUCTURE OF RACIAL STEREOTYPE SUBGROUPING

2002 ◽  
Vol 30 (7) ◽  
pp. 709-727 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raymond J. Green ◽  
Robert Manzi
Keyword(s):  
Social Cognition ◽  
Data Collection ◽  
Discriminant Function Analysis ◽  
Person Perception ◽  
Function Analysis ◽  
Cognitive Structure ◽  
Sorting Task ◽  
Generation Task ◽  
Data Collection And Analysis ◽  
Racial Stereotype

Our goal was to initiate a series of explorations of the techniques used to investigate person perception and stereotypes. More specifically, do different techniques uncover the same, and assumedly correct, underlying cognitive structure of the perceivers or is our current understanding of social cognition merely a reflection of our data collection and analytic techniques? We also hoped to draw some conclusions concerning White participants' perceptions of Blacks. Participants were given two tasks. One task involved sorting fourteen racial type labels and rating the sorted piles on four scales (e.g., respectable-not respectable). The second task involved generating attributes that described a randomly selected racial type. Both tasks provided data that could be used as input for multidimensional-scaling and hierarchical-clustering analyses. Further, the data from the adjective-generation task was used as input for a discriminant-function analysis. It was predicted that the different data collection and analysis tasks would produce results that emphasized the importance of evaluation in racialtype perception but that the sorting task would reveal more prejudice against Black targets. The results supported the hypotheses.

scholarly journals Distress disclosure and psychological Distress among men: the role of feeling understood and loneliness

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian TaeHyuk Keum ◽  
John L. Oliffe ◽  
Simon M. Rice ◽  
David Kealy ◽  
Zac E. Seidler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Psychological Distress ◽  
Group Analysis ◽  
Mediation Model ◽  
Adult Men ◽  
Path Analyses ◽  
Asian Men ◽  
Race Ethnicity ◽  
Post Hoc ◽  
Distress Disclosure ◽  
Better Than

AbstractWe examined whether men’s distress disclosure would be indirectly associated with psychological distress through feeling understood by others and loneliness as serial or parallel mediators. We conducted path analyses (N = 1827 adult men; mean 37.53 years, SD = 14.14) to test the mediators while controlling for race/ethnicity. Post-hoc multi-group analysis was conducted to examine differences across White and Asian men. The serial mediation model fit the data better than the parallel mediation model. Controlling for race/ethnicity, a significant partial indirect association was found between greater distress disclosure and lower psychological distress through greater feelings of being understood and lower feelings of loneliness. Post-hoc multi-group analysis suggested that the hypothesized paths fit equivalently across White and Asian men, and the direct effect was not significant for Asian men. Our hypothesized serial model also fit the data significantly better than alternative models with distress and the mediators predicting disclosure. Distress disclosure may be a socially conducive strategy for men to feel understood and socially connected, a process that may be associated with lower psychological distress.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document