Registered Replication Report on Mazar, Amir, and Ariely (2008)

Bruno Verschuere, Ewout H. Meijer, Ariane Jim, Katherine Hoogesteyn, Robin Orthey, Randy J. McCarthy, John J. Skowronski, Oguz A. Acar, Balazs Aczel, Bence E. Bakos, Fernando Barbosa, Ernest Baskin, Laurent Bègue, Gershon Ben-Shakhar, Angie R. Birt, Lisa Blatz, Steve D. Charman, Aline Claesen, Samuel L. Clay, Sean P. CoaryJan Crusius, Jacqueline R. Evans, Noa Feldman, Fernando Ferreira-Santos, Matthias Gamer, Sara Gomes, Marta González-Iraizoz, Felix Holzmeister, Juergen Huber, Andrea Isoni, Ryan K. Jessup, Michael Kirchler, Nathalie klein Selle, Lina Koppel, Marton Kovacs, Tei Laine, Frank Lentz, David D. Loschelder, Elliot A. Ludvig, Monty L. Lynn, Scott D. Martin, Neil M. McLatchie, Mario Mechtel, Galit Nahari, Asil Ali Özdoğru, Rita Pasion, Charlotte R. Pennington, Arne Roets, Nir Rozmann, Irene Scopelliti, Eli Spiegelman, Kristina Suchotzki, Angela Sutan, Peter Szecsi, Gustav Tinghög, Jean-Christian Tisserand, Ulrich S. Tran, Alain Van Hiel, Wolf Vanpaemel, Daniel Västfjäll, Thomas Verliefde, Kévin Vezirian, Martin Voracek, Lara Warmelink, Katherine Wick, Bradford J. Wiggins, Keith Wylie, Ezgi Yıldız

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

The self-concept maintenance theory holds that many people will cheat in order to maximize self-profit, but only to the extent that they can do so while maintaining a positive self-concept. Mazar, Amir, and Ariely (2008, Experiment 1) gave participants an opportunity and incentive to cheat on a problem-solving task. Prior to that task, participants either recalled the Ten Commandments (a moral reminder) or recalled 10 books they had read in high school (a neutral task). Results were consistent with the self-concept maintenance theory. When given the opportunity to cheat, participants given the moral-reminder priming task reported solving 1.45 fewer matrices than did those given a neutral prime (Cohen?s d = 0.48); moral reminders reduced cheating. Mazar et al.?s article is among the most cited in deception research, but their Experiment 1 has not been replicated directly. This Registered Replication Report describes the aggregated result of 25 direct replications (total N = 5,786), all of which followed the same preregistered protocol. In the primary meta-analysis (19 replications, total n = 4,674), participants who were given an opportunity to cheat reported solving 0.11 more matrices if they were given a moral reminder than if they were given a neutral reminder (95% confidence interval = [?0.09, 0.31]). This small effect was numerically in the opposite direction of the effect observed in the original study (Cohen?s d = ?0.04).
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)299-317
Number of pages19
JournalAdvances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science
Volume1
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Sep 2018

Cite this

Verschuere, Bruno ; Meijer, Ewout H. ; Jim, Ariane ; Hoogesteyn, Katherine ; Orthey, Robin ; McCarthy, Randy J. ; Skowronski, John J. ; Acar, Oguz A. ; Aczel, Balazs ; Bakos, Bence E. ; Barbosa, Fernando ; Baskin, Ernest ; Bègue, Laurent ; Ben-Shakhar, Gershon ; Birt, Angie R. ; Blatz, Lisa ; Charman, Steve D. ; Claesen, Aline ; Clay, Samuel L. ; Coary, Sean P. ; Crusius, Jan ; Evans, Jacqueline R. ; Feldman, Noa ; Ferreira-Santos, Fernando ; Gamer, Matthias ; Gomes, Sara ; González-Iraizoz, Marta ; Holzmeister, Felix ; Huber, Juergen ; Isoni, Andrea ; Jessup, Ryan K. ; Kirchler, Michael ; klein Selle, Nathalie ; Koppel, Lina ; Kovacs, Marton ; Laine, Tei ; Lentz, Frank ; Loschelder, David D. ; Ludvig, Elliot A. ; Lynn, Monty L. ; Martin, Scott D. ; McLatchie, Neil M. ; Mechtel, Mario ; Nahari, Galit ; Özdoğru, Asil Ali ; Pasion, Rita ; Pennington, Charlotte R. ; Roets, Arne ; Rozmann, Nir ; Scopelliti, Irene ; Spiegelman, Eli ; Suchotzki, Kristina ; Sutan, Angela ; Szecsi, Peter ; Tinghög, Gustav ; Tisserand, Jean-Christian ; Tran, Ulrich S. ; Van Hiel, Alain ; Vanpaemel, Wolf ; Västfjäll, Daniel ; Verliefde, Thomas ; Vezirian, Kévin ; Voracek, Martin ; Warmelink, Lara ; Wick, Katherine ; Wiggins, Bradford J. ; Wylie, Keith ; Yıldız, Ezgi. / Registered Replication Report on Mazar, Amir, and Ariely (2008). In: Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science. 2018 ; Vol. 1, No. 3. pp. 299-317.
@article{a9dc837f50704332a3348869d9acb184,
title = "Registered Replication Report on Mazar, Amir, and Ariely (2008)",
abstract = "The self-concept maintenance theory holds that many people will cheat in order to maximize self-profit, but only to the extent that they can do so while maintaining a positive self-concept. Mazar, Amir, and Ariely (2008, Experiment 1) gave participants an opportunity and incentive to cheat on a problem-solving task. Prior to that task, participants either recalled the Ten Commandments (a moral reminder) or recalled 10 books they had read in high school (a neutral task). Results were consistent with the self-concept maintenance theory. When given the opportunity to cheat, participants given the moral-reminder priming task reported solving 1.45 fewer matrices than did those given a neutral prime (Cohen?s d = 0.48); moral reminders reduced cheating. Mazar et al.?s article is among the most cited in deception research, but their Experiment 1 has not been replicated directly. This Registered Replication Report describes the aggregated result of 25 direct replications (total N = 5,786), all of which followed the same preregistered protocol. In the primary meta-analysis (19 replications, total n = 4,674), participants who were given an opportunity to cheat reported solving 0.11 more matrices if they were given a moral reminder than if they were given a neutral reminder (95{\%} confidence interval = [?0.09, 0.31]). This small effect was numerically in the opposite direction of the effect observed in the original study (Cohen?s d = ?0.04).",
author = "Bruno Verschuere and Meijer, {Ewout H.} and Ariane Jim and Katherine Hoogesteyn and Robin Orthey and McCarthy, {Randy J.} and Skowronski, {John J.} and Acar, {Oguz A.} and Balazs Aczel and Bakos, {Bence E.} and Fernando Barbosa and Ernest Baskin and Laurent B{\`e}gue and Gershon Ben-Shakhar and Birt, {Angie R.} and Lisa Blatz and Charman, {Steve D.} and Aline Claesen and Clay, {Samuel L.} and Coary, {Sean P.} and Jan Crusius and Evans, {Jacqueline R.} and Noa Feldman and Fernando Ferreira-Santos and Matthias Gamer and Sara Gomes and Marta Gonz{\'a}lez-Iraizoz and Felix Holzmeister and Juergen Huber and Andrea Isoni and Jessup, {Ryan K.} and Michael Kirchler and {klein Selle}, Nathalie and Lina Koppel and Marton Kovacs and Tei Laine and Frank Lentz and Loschelder, {David D.} and Ludvig, {Elliot A.} and Lynn, {Monty L.} and Martin, {Scott D.} and McLatchie, {Neil M.} and Mario Mechtel and Galit Nahari and {\"O}zdoğru, {Asil Ali} and Rita Pasion and Pennington, {Charlotte R.} and Arne Roets and Nir Rozmann and Irene Scopelliti and Eli Spiegelman and Kristina Suchotzki and Angela Sutan and Peter Szecsi and Gustav Tingh{\"o}g and Jean-Christian Tisserand and Tran, {Ulrich S.} and {Van Hiel}, Alain and Wolf Vanpaemel and Daniel V{\"a}stfj{\"a}ll and Thomas Verliefde and K{\'e}vin Vezirian and Martin Voracek and Lara Warmelink and Katherine Wick and Wiggins, {Bradford J.} and Keith Wylie and Ezgi Yıldız",
note = "doi: 10.1177/2515245918781032",
year = "2018",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/2515245918781032",
language = "English",
volume = "1",
pages = "299--317",
journal = "Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science",
issn = "2515-2459",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
number = "3",

}

Verschuere, B, Meijer, EH, Jim, A, Hoogesteyn, K, Orthey, R, McCarthy, RJ, Skowronski, JJ, Acar, OA, Aczel, B, Bakos, BE, Barbosa, F, Baskin, E, Bègue, L, Ben-Shakhar, G, Birt, AR, Blatz, L, Charman, SD, Claesen, A, Clay, SL, Coary, SP, Crusius, J, Evans, JR, Feldman, N, Ferreira-Santos, F, Gamer, M, Gomes, S, González-Iraizoz, M, Holzmeister, F, Huber, J, Isoni, A, Jessup, RK, Kirchler, M, klein Selle, N, Koppel, L, Kovacs, M, Laine, T, Lentz, F, Loschelder, DD, Ludvig, EA, Lynn, ML, Martin, SD, McLatchie, NM, Mechtel, M, Nahari, G, Özdoğru, AA, Pasion, R, Pennington, CR, Roets, A, Rozmann, N, Scopelliti, I, Spiegelman, E, Suchotzki, K, Sutan, A, Szecsi, P, Tinghög, G, Tisserand, J-C, Tran, US, Van Hiel, A, Vanpaemel, W, Västfjäll, D, Verliefde, T, Vezirian, K, Voracek, M, Warmelink, L, Wick, K, Wiggins, BJ, Wylie, K & Yıldız, E 2018, 'Registered Replication Report on Mazar, Amir, and Ariely (2008)', Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 299-317. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245918781032

Registered Replication Report on Mazar, Amir, and Ariely (2008). / Verschuere, Bruno; Meijer, Ewout H.; Jim, Ariane; Hoogesteyn, Katherine; Orthey, Robin; McCarthy, Randy J.; Skowronski, John J.; Acar, Oguz A.; Aczel, Balazs; Bakos, Bence E.; Barbosa, Fernando; Baskin, Ernest; Bègue, Laurent; Ben-Shakhar, Gershon; Birt, Angie R.; Blatz, Lisa; Charman, Steve D.; Claesen, Aline; Clay, Samuel L.; Coary, Sean P.; Crusius, Jan; Evans, Jacqueline R.; Feldman, Noa; Ferreira-Santos, Fernando; Gamer, Matthias; Gomes, Sara; González-Iraizoz, Marta; Holzmeister, Felix; Huber, Juergen; Isoni, Andrea; Jessup, Ryan K.; Kirchler, Michael; klein Selle, Nathalie; Koppel, Lina; Kovacs, Marton; Laine, Tei; Lentz, Frank; Loschelder, David D.; Ludvig, Elliot A.; Lynn, Monty L.; Martin, Scott D.; McLatchie, Neil M.; Mechtel, Mario; Nahari, Galit; Özdoğru, Asil Ali; Pasion, Rita; Pennington, Charlotte R.; Roets, Arne; Rozmann, Nir; Scopelliti, Irene; Spiegelman, Eli; Suchotzki, Kristina; Sutan, Angela; Szecsi, Peter; Tinghög, Gustav; Tisserand, Jean-Christian; Tran, Ulrich S.; Van Hiel, Alain; Vanpaemel, Wolf; Västfjäll, Daniel; Verliefde, Thomas; Vezirian, Kévin; Voracek, Martin; Warmelink, Lara; Wick, Katherine; Wiggins, Bradford J.; Wylie, Keith; Yıldız, Ezgi.

In: Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, Vol. 1, No. 3, 01.09.2018, p. 299-317.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Registered Replication Report on Mazar, Amir, and Ariely (2008)

AU - Verschuere, Bruno

AU - Meijer, Ewout H.

AU - Jim, Ariane

AU - Hoogesteyn, Katherine

AU - Orthey, Robin

AU - McCarthy, Randy J.

AU - Skowronski, John J.

AU - Acar, Oguz A.

AU - Aczel, Balazs

AU - Bakos, Bence E.

AU - Barbosa, Fernando

AU - Baskin, Ernest

AU - Bègue, Laurent

AU - Ben-Shakhar, Gershon

AU - Birt, Angie R.

AU - Blatz, Lisa

AU - Charman, Steve D.

AU - Claesen, Aline

AU - Clay, Samuel L.

AU - Coary, Sean P.

AU - Crusius, Jan

AU - Evans, Jacqueline R.

AU - Feldman, Noa

AU - Ferreira-Santos, Fernando

AU - Gamer, Matthias

AU - Gomes, Sara

AU - González-Iraizoz, Marta

AU - Holzmeister, Felix

AU - Huber, Juergen

AU - Isoni, Andrea

AU - Jessup, Ryan K.

AU - Kirchler, Michael

AU - klein Selle, Nathalie

AU - Koppel, Lina

AU - Kovacs, Marton

AU - Laine, Tei

AU - Lentz, Frank

AU - Loschelder, David D.

AU - Ludvig, Elliot A.

AU - Lynn, Monty L.

AU - Martin, Scott D.

AU - McLatchie, Neil M.

AU - Mechtel, Mario

AU - Nahari, Galit

AU - Özdoğru, Asil Ali

AU - Pasion, Rita

AU - Pennington, Charlotte R.

AU - Roets, Arne

AU - Rozmann, Nir

AU - Scopelliti, Irene

AU - Spiegelman, Eli

AU - Suchotzki, Kristina

AU - Sutan, Angela

AU - Szecsi, Peter

AU - Tinghög, Gustav

AU - Tisserand, Jean-Christian

AU - Tran, Ulrich S.

AU - Van Hiel, Alain

AU - Vanpaemel, Wolf

AU - Västfjäll, Daniel

AU - Verliefde, Thomas

AU - Vezirian, Kévin

AU - Voracek, Martin

AU - Warmelink, Lara

AU - Wick, Katherine

AU - Wiggins, Bradford J.

AU - Wylie, Keith

AU - Yıldız, Ezgi

N1 - doi: 10.1177/2515245918781032

PY - 2018/9/1

Y1 - 2018/9/1

N2 - The self-concept maintenance theory holds that many people will cheat in order to maximize self-profit, but only to the extent that they can do so while maintaining a positive self-concept. Mazar, Amir, and Ariely (2008, Experiment 1) gave participants an opportunity and incentive to cheat on a problem-solving task. Prior to that task, participants either recalled the Ten Commandments (a moral reminder) or recalled 10 books they had read in high school (a neutral task). Results were consistent with the self-concept maintenance theory. When given the opportunity to cheat, participants given the moral-reminder priming task reported solving 1.45 fewer matrices than did those given a neutral prime (Cohen?s d = 0.48); moral reminders reduced cheating. Mazar et al.?s article is among the most cited in deception research, but their Experiment 1 has not been replicated directly. This Registered Replication Report describes the aggregated result of 25 direct replications (total N = 5,786), all of which followed the same preregistered protocol. In the primary meta-analysis (19 replications, total n = 4,674), participants who were given an opportunity to cheat reported solving 0.11 more matrices if they were given a moral reminder than if they were given a neutral reminder (95% confidence interval = [?0.09, 0.31]). This small effect was numerically in the opposite direction of the effect observed in the original study (Cohen?s d = ?0.04).

AB - The self-concept maintenance theory holds that many people will cheat in order to maximize self-profit, but only to the extent that they can do so while maintaining a positive self-concept. Mazar, Amir, and Ariely (2008, Experiment 1) gave participants an opportunity and incentive to cheat on a problem-solving task. Prior to that task, participants either recalled the Ten Commandments (a moral reminder) or recalled 10 books they had read in high school (a neutral task). Results were consistent with the self-concept maintenance theory. When given the opportunity to cheat, participants given the moral-reminder priming task reported solving 1.45 fewer matrices than did those given a neutral prime (Cohen?s d = 0.48); moral reminders reduced cheating. Mazar et al.?s article is among the most cited in deception research, but their Experiment 1 has not been replicated directly. This Registered Replication Report describes the aggregated result of 25 direct replications (total N = 5,786), all of which followed the same preregistered protocol. In the primary meta-analysis (19 replications, total n = 4,674), participants who were given an opportunity to cheat reported solving 0.11 more matrices if they were given a moral reminder than if they were given a neutral reminder (95% confidence interval = [?0.09, 0.31]). This small effect was numerically in the opposite direction of the effect observed in the original study (Cohen?s d = ?0.04).

U2 - 10.1177/2515245918781032

DO - 10.1177/2515245918781032

M3 - Article

VL - 1

SP - 299

EP - 317

JO - Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science

JF - Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science

SN - 2515-2459

IS - 3

ER -