Anna Behler
VerifiedNorth Carolina State University · Psychology
Active 1989–2022
Research topics
- Psychology
- Social psychology
- Biology
- Clinical psychology
- Medicine
- Philosophy
- Statistics
- Cognitive psychology
- Linguistics
- Mathematics
Selected publications
A Multi-Site Collaborative Study of the Hostile Priming Effect
Collabra Psychology · 2021 · 10 citations
- Psychology
- Social psychology
- Cognitive psychology
In a now-classic study by Srull and Wyer (1979), people who were exposed to phrases with hostile content subsequently judged a man as being more hostile. And this “hostile priming effect” has had a significant influence on the field of social cognition over the subsequent decades. However, a recent multi-lab collaborative study (McCarthy et al., 2018) that closely followed the methods described by Srull and Wyer (1979) found a hostile priming effect that was nearly zero, which casts doubt on whether these methods reliably produce an effect. To address some limitations with McCarthy et al. (2018), the current multi-site collaborative study included data collected from 29 labs. Each lab conducted a close replication (total N = 2,123) and a conceptual replication (total N = 2,579) of Srull and Wyer’s methods. The hostile priming effect for both the close replication (d = 0.09, 95% CI [-0.04, 0.22], z = 1.34, p = .16) and the conceptual replication (d = 0.05, 95% CI [-0.04, 0.15], z = 1.15, p = .58) were not significantly different from zero and, if the true effects are non-zero, were smaller than what most labs could feasibly and routinely detect. Despite our best efforts to produce favorable conditions for the effect to emerge, we did not detect a hostile priming effect. We suggest that researchers should not invest more resources into trying to detect a hostile priming effect using methods like those described in Srull and Wyer (1979).
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · 2020 · 34 citations
- Psychology
- Social psychology
- Clinical psychology
Selective reporting practices (SRPs)-adding, dropping, or altering study elements when preparing reports for publication-are thought to increase false positives in scientific research. Yet analyses of SRPs have been limited to self-reports or analyses of pre-registered and published studies. To assess SRPs in social psychological research more broadly, we compared doctoral dissertations defended between 1999 and 2017 with the publications based on those dissertations. Selective reporting occurred in nearly 50% of studies. Fully supported dissertation hypotheses were 3 times more likely to be published than unsupported hypotheses, while unsupported hypotheses were nearly 4 times more likely to be dropped from publications. Few hypotheses were found to be altered or added post hoc. Dissertation studies with fewer supported hypotheses were more likely to remove participants or measures from publications. Selective hypothesis reporting and dropped measures significantly predicted greater hypothesis support in published studies, supporting concerns that SRPs may increase Type 1 error risk.
Frequent coauthors
- 8 shared
Jeffrey Green
- 3 shared
Daniel R. Berry
Radford University
- 3 shared
Athena H. Cairo
Virginia Commonwealth University
- 2 shared
Jody L. Davis
Goddard Space Flight Center
- 2 shared
Katie Rodriguez
University of Florida Health
- 2 shared
Rachel C. Garthe
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign
- 2 shared
Jerome Olsen
- 2 shared
Jennifer A. Joy-Gaba
Virginia Commonwealth University
Similar researchers at North Carolina State University
- Resume-aware match score
- Save to shortlist
- AI-drafted outreach
See your match with Anna Behler
PhdFit ranks faculty by your research interests, methods, and publications — grounded in their actual work, not templates.
- Free to start
- No credit card
- 30-second signup