Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
Discourse on measurement.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
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
18 authors.
Clintin P Davis-Stober *Department of Psychological Sciences, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211.ORCID 0000-0002-6836-6979
Alexandra Sarafoglou *Department of Psychology, Psychological Methods Unit, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam 1001 NK, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-0031-685X
Balazs AczelDepartment of Affective Psychology, Institute of Psychology, Eotvos Lorand University, Budapest 1063, Hungary.ORCID 0000-0001-9364-4988
Suyog H ChandramouliDepartment of Information and Computer Engineering, Aalto University, Espoo 02150, Finland.ORCID 0000-0002-3450-1909
Sarahanne M FieldPedagogical and Educational Sciences, University of Groningen, Groningen 9712 TJ, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-7874-1261
Ayelet FishbachBooth School of Business, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637.
Juliana FreireDepartment of Computer Science, Tandon School of Engineering, New York University, New York, NY 10011.ORCID 0000-0003-3915-7075
John P A IoannidisDepartment of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305.ORCID 0000-0003-3118-6859
Klaus OberauerDepartment of Psychology, University of Zurich, Zurich 8050, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-3902-7318
Franco PestilliDepartment of Psychology, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712.ORCID 0000-0002-2469-0494
Susanne ResslDepartment of Neuroscience, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712.ORCID 0000-0002-6442-4780
Daniel J SchadInstitute of Mind, Brain and Behavior, Psychology Department, Health and Medical University, Potsdam 14471, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-2586-6823
Judith Ter SchureDepartment of Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam 1105AZ, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2147-5510
Katya TentoriCenter for Mind/Brain Sciences, University of Trento, Rovereto 38068, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-5968-9936
Don van RavenzwaaijDepartment of Psychology, Psychometrics and Statistics, University of Groningen, Groningen 9712 TS, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-5030-4091
Joachim VandekerckhoveDepartment of Cognitive Sciences, University of California, Irvine, CA 92697.ORCID 0000-0003-2600-5937
Odd Erik GundersenDepartment of Computer Science, Faculty of Information Technology and Electrical Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim 7030, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-9754-5941
Funding
A rigorous test of dual process model predictions for problematic alcohol involvementR01AA030914 · NIAAA · UNIVERSITY OF IOWA · PI BRUCE D BARTHOLOW, DENIS M MCCARTHY · 2023 to 2026
$2.7M
A community-driven development of the brain imaging data standard (BIDS) to describe macroscopic brain connectionsR01MH126699 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN · PI PESTILLI, FRANCO · 2021 to 2022
$681k
CRCNS: US-France Data Sharing Proposal: Open science & cloud computing of MEEGR01EB030896 · NIBIB · TRUSTEES OF INDIANA UNIVERSITY · PI PESTILLI, FRANCO, PUCE, AINA · 2020 to 2022
$651k
CRCNS: US-France Data Sharing Proposal: Lowering the barrier of entry to network neuroscienceR01EB029272 · NIBIB · TRUSTEES OF INDIANA UNIVERSITY · PI BASSETT, DANIELLE SMITH, BETZEL, RICHARD F · 2019 to 2021
$546k
HHS | National Institutes of Health (NIH) R01AA030914HHS | National Institutes of Health (NIH) R01EB029272HHS | National Institutes of Health (NIH) R01EB030896HHS | National Institutes of Health (NIH) R01MH126699National Science Foundation (NSF) 1230118National Science Foundation (NSF) 1636893National Science Foundation (NSF) 1658303National Science Foundation (NSF) 1734853National Science Foundation (NSF) 1850849National Science Foundation (NSF) 1912270National Science Foundation (NSF) 1916518National Science Foundation (NSF) 2051186National Science Foundation (NSF) 2106888National Science Foundation (NSF) 2146306NIAAA NIH HHS R01 AA030914NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB029272NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB030896NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH126699U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) W81XWH2110173Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself
Abstract
Replication and the reported crises impacting many fields of research have become a focal point for the sciences. This has led to reforms in publishing, methodological design and reporting, and increased numbers of experimental replications coordinated across many laboratories. While replication is rightly considered an indispensable tool of science, financial resources and researchers' time are quite limited. In this perspective, we examine different values and attitudes that scientists can consider when deciding whether to replicate a finding and how. We offer a conceptual framework for assessing the usefulness of various replication tools, such as preregistration.
Indexed as
Decision MakingResearch DesignHumansReproducibility of Resultsmethodologyreformreplicationreproducibility
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.
How can we make sound replication decisions? · full record | OpenQuestion