Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29356929›Full record

ArticleJournal of psycholinguistic research2018

Dealing with the Conflicting Results of Psycholinguistic Experiments: How to Resolve Them with the Help of Statistical Meta-analysis.

Csilla Rákosi

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of psycholinguistic research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Csilla RákosiMTA-DE-SZTE Research Group for Theoretical Linguistics, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, University of Debrecen, Pf. 400, Debrecen, 4002, Hungary. rakosics@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3342-7871

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper proposes the use of the tools of statistical meta-analysis as a method of conflict resolution with respect to experiments in cognitive linguistics. With the help of statistical meta-analysis, the effect size of similar experiments can be compared, a well-founded and robust synthesis of the experimental data can be achieved, and possible causes of any divergence(s) in the outcomes can be revealed. This application of statistical meta-analysis offers a novel method of how diverging evidence can be dealt with. The workability of this idea is exemplified by a case study dealing with a series of experiments conducted as non-exact replications of Thibodeau and Boroditsky (PLoS ONE 6(2):e16782, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0016782 ).

Indexed as

Data Interpretation, StatisticalMeta-Analysis as TopicHumansPsycholinguisticsResearch DesignDiverging evidenceExperiments on metaphor processingInconsistency resolutionReplication of experimentsStatistical meta-analysis

Identifiers

PMID29356929

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.