Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30397114›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2018

Toward a psychology of

Mostafa Salari Rad, Alison Jane Martingano, Jeremy Ginges

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 178 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
178citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
–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

178 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. People's Responses to Nuclear Weapons: Mapping Post-Cold War Research.Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Some culture is hiding in plain sight in research on child development.The British journal of developmental psychology · 2026
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Why do children and adults believe others apologize?The British journal of developmental psychology · 2026
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. WEIRD but Also Inconsistent: An Analysis of the Reporting Practices of Participant Samples Across Five Areas of Psychology.International journal of psychology : Journal international de psychologie · 2026
    Article

118 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

3 authors.

Mostafa Salari RadDepartment of Psychology, New School for Social Research, New York, NY 10011.
Alison Jane MartinganoDepartment of Psychology, New School for Social Research, New York, NY 10011.
Jeremy GingesDepartment of Psychology, New School for Social Research, New York, NY 10011; gingesj@newschool.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Two primary goals of psychological science should be to understand what aspects of human psychology are universal and the way that context and culture produce variability. This requires that we take into account the importance of culture and context in the way that we write our papers and in the types of populations that we sample. However, most research published in our leading journals has relied on sampling WEIRD (Western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic) populations. One might expect that our scholarly work and editorial choices would by now reflect the knowledge that Western populations may not be representative of humans generally with respect to any given psychological phenomenon. However, as we show here, almost all research published by one of our leading journals,

Indexed as

CognitionCross-Cultural ComparisonCultural DiversityPeriodicals as TopicBibliometricsDeveloped CountriesDeveloping CountriesEditorial PoliciesHumansPsychology, SocialSex Factorscognitionculturediversitymethodologypsychological science

Identifiers

PMID30397114
PMCPMC6233089

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.