Aaron Charlton @AaronCharlton Twitter profile | Pikagi

Pikagi

Aaron Charlton

@AaronCharlton

1,283

Followers

420

Following

642

Media

4,251

Statuses

Marketing Scientist specializing in SEO Past: Marketing academia, Iraq/Afghanistan veteran

Mesa, Arizona, USA

https://t.co/Lf8fIgnA6Y

Joined April 2011

Don't wanna be here? Send us removal request.

Pinned Tweet

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

6 months

New JCR replication just dropped! Unfortunately, this study also did not replicate. That pushes the world's most prestigious Consumer Behavior journal down to an abysmal 3.3% replication rate (1 out of 30).

Tweet media one

@LohrErik

Erik Løhre

6 months

New paper out: My first registered report and a work of joy with the dream team of @PRASAC , @LewendM and @ThorvaldHaerem . We set out to replicate Karmarkar & Tormala (2010), which showed experts can be persuasive by expressing uncertainty...

2

5

22

2

16

69

Last Seen Profiles

@stw46

@ciroiadocico

@CuidsSemogg

@qaisi37

@I14Sportscom1

@eldevilish

@ms_sluttyVani

@Jasonthejostar

@SukaIbuIbuTua2

@idinamenzel

@mshal20263479

@heiyaozhilong85

@poughhkeepsiee

@teun943625

@ta7aror69

@mhb1851

@bruisedfemme

@samoasimy99

@cukienaknikmati

@kiichigo03

@francis41886127

@sliccardo

@CuidsSemogg

@as24diB

@mhewelt1

@bokeplokalmalam

@FCSL_Lightning

@CuidsSemogg

@HydenDiana20216

@Zcnsrpl

@akibritci

@FLALoudMouth

@notwobbling

@JirehmaeKim

@NumanKurtulmus

@shailly_godiyal

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

2 years

The Journal of Consumer Research (Consumer Behavior's top journal) now stands at a 3.4% replication rate. So far, 29 replications have been attempted and one has succeeded.

Tweet media one

17

164

791

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

2 years

Cool paper! As sample sizes have increased, effect sizes have decreased in marketing research.

Tweet media one

@AntoniaKrefeld

Antonia Krefeld - Schwalb

@AntoniaKrefeld

2 years

Finally there! Over the last 12 years Consumer researcher has started to use bigger samples and report more studies, but observed effect sizes decreased over time. Overall we do not see any indicator for changes in the replicability of the research!

3

25

99

10

98

607

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

1 year

The email exchange regarding Dan Ariely's efforts to pressure a UCLA professor to cover for him have been posted to EJMR. I've collected them all in one place. @Fernwood2Nite

Tweet card media

UCLA Professor Refuses to Cover for Dan Ariely in Issue of Data Provenance - Open MKT

In one of the more bizarre twists of the Dan Ariely saga, there is a huge issue of provenance in one of Dan Ariely’s studies. The study in question is Dan Ariely’s Ten Commandments study at JMR. The...

14

71

372

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

11 months

@Chris_Said It's interesting to see how all the fraudsters converge on a disease with no cure and no hope for effective treatment on the horizon.

18

11

313

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

1 year

Piff et al. (2012) fails to replicate. This is the idea that higher SES people are more likely to behave unethically.

Tweet media one

10

69

290

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

2 years

People don't realize that they are p-hacking so I'm going to break it down using a study I'm very familiar with (not published by me) as an example.

4

50

252

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

6 months

The marketing replication tracker is up-to-date. The current replication rate is 11.4%.

Tweet media one

6

35

170

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

1 year

I see this study everywhere. 3% vs 30%? Never happened. 🙄 Once again a reminder that if our cute little tricks had this kind of effect business managers around the world would be devouring every issue of Journal of Marketing.

Tweet media one

6

7

147

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

7 months

Francesca Gino was caught using fake data on 4 separate scientific studies. All of the data was tracked back to her personal computer and password-protected online accounts. Now we know she has failed to offer any evidence someone else did it.

3

7

140

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

1 year

Was Dan Ariely's "creativity" with the data an open secret all this time? If yes, why aren't there more checks in place to stop it from happening? How did he get away with it for so long?

@R_Thaler

Richard H Thaler

1 year

I have known for years that Dan Ariely made stuff up but now it turns out that it is ok because his book was a novel!

56

167

869

6

8

137

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

1 year

I don't usually post academic career-related content but ghis knowledge bomb from ejmr was too good not to share.

Tweet media one

10

12

118

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

1 year

We're close to figuring out why marketing studies haven't been replicating. Just one letter left to guess. See all of the evidence of bias here:

Tweet media one

4

31

104

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

2 years

Dan Ariely claims authorship order shields him from blame; speculates that a low-level envelope stuffer committed the fraud

Dan Ariely claims authorship order shields him from blame; speculates that a low-level envelope...

If you haven’t heard, world-famous marketing professor, Dan Ariely, was caught with fake data in fall of 2021. I’m not saying that he faked the data but he hasn’t done anything yet (show evidence,...

5

21

89

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

3 years

The PNAS meta-nudge data :) You can see that Wansink's effect sizes are generally too big for a p-hacker. He must have been up to something else. I wonder what it was... cc @sTeamTraen BTW sorry to beat a dead horse but there seems to be a lot of doubt about what happened!

Tweet media one

4

17

78

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

1 year

Ariely's most cited study of all time is under scrutiny because the group he said collected the data did not in fact collect the data. This is the same Ten Commandments study which failed to replicate in a large-scale mass replication effort.

1

4

81

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

1 year

In marketing, the more prestigious the journal, the more likely the article is to be p-hacked. This pattern doesn't occur in any field of psychology.

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

1 year

@doughertyorama & Horne (2022) supplemental materials: 1) P-values in marketing look very bad compared to every field of psychology 2) Negative correlation between impact factor and p-value quality in marketing

Tweet media one

3

5

23

5

11

74

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

3 years

I found it really shocking that PNAS would publish a meta-analysis in which nearly all of the outliers (d=1+) are Brian Wansink papers. How is that okay? cc @sTeamTraen

@mjbsp

Mark Brandt

3 years

New meta-analysis of choice architecture interventions finds a positive effect. But look at this funnel plot. Depending on your assumptions, the true effect is either ~25% smaller (and sig), or basically zero

Tweet media one

Tweet media two

6

15

84

5

15

60

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

1 year

Failure to replicate the "brain drain" effect. This is the idea that the mere presence of a smartphone makes people perform worse on tasks requiring concentration.

1

19

64

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

1 year

Someone just leaked part of the forensic analysis of Dubois, Rucker and Galinsky 2016 on EJMR. This is the paper that the JCR policy board said is fine. Narrator: It's not fine.

Tweet media one

2

9

62

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

2 years

Who cares if it's relevant if it's not true? In a way it's better if false findings are irrelevant. If they were more relevant they could cause harm to the public when misguided policies waste time and money (e.g. Ariely's sign at the top fiasco).

1

2

61

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

1 year

In a 2011 email exchange Dan Ariely told his co-author that he had changed the conditions to be more descriptive, accidentally flipping every value, and she should change them back. We now know that the conditions were never changed to be more descriptive.

Tweet media one

1

7

59

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

3 years

Just be careful when you're using @GoogleTrends data in your study. The biggest problem is that many of the differences you will see are linguistic differences rather than differences in search volume. I'll tell you what I mean...

1

10

58

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

2 years

BIG CHANGE: Going forward Manuscript Central won't allow you to submit a paper to JCR unless you first publicly post your data on OSF.

Tweet media one

2

7

55

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

1 year

I find it stunning that so many would support Francesca Gino after Harvard and Data Colada have proven her to be a fraud and publicly presented their evidence. Reminds me of the Andrew Wakefield (vaccine-autism fraud) debacle.

14

0

57

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

2 years

When the data used for the analyses are different than the raw data in Qualtrics 🚨🚨(just retracted at Journal of Marketing Research) cc @retractionwatch

Tweet media one

2

7

52

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

1 year

Everyone involved in Dan Ariely’s fake data scandal now has an alibi—except for Ariely himself

Tweet card media

Everyone involved in Dan Ariely's fake data scandal now has an alibi—except for Ariely himself -...

In the fall of 2021, Dan Ariely, the most famous marketing professor in the world, was caught with fake data. A prominent study about how to make people more honest by signing at the top of the...

4

8

50

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

3 years

The bulk of mediation test CIs in marketing just barely exclude zero. That's not good for evidence quality. Here is a draft of my analysis with @AmandaKMontoya , John Price and @JoeHilgard . Your feedback is most welcome! 🧵

Noise in the process: Assessing the evidential value of mediation analyses in marketing journals

Mediation analysis plays a central role in marketing research due to its usefulness in helping to explain complex processes. Like other forms of inference, mediation analyses are susceptible to false...

3

12

49

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

3 years

Effect of choice architecture trends toward zero as sample size increases. I see this a lot in various effects. Credit to @i_evangelidis for bringing it up. Note that I've removed Wansink, Shu et al. 2012, and the 2 miscalculated effects here.

Tweet media one

4

8

46

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

2 years

Just added a 2019 replication that I had missed to the marketing replication tracker. This moves our success rate down slightly to 3 out of 34 (8.8%).

Tweet media one

6

12

49

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

2 years

NEW: Jayati Sinha, a Marketing Professor at Florida International University, just got her second retraction. She also has two Expressions of Concern and recently made massive corrections on another paper. 🧵

Tweet media one

4

7

47

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

1 year

Loftus (1979) fails to replication in registered report. The original study claimed that exposure to blatant misinformation reduces susceptibility to subsequent subtle misinformation (inoculation effect).

Tweet media one

Tweet media two

2

12

41

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

1 year

A chart showing all the direct replications in marketing. 😬 I just added the JACR failure to replicate pushing it down slightly to 11.4% success rate. Look at JCR though!

Tweet media one

6

10

41

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

1 year

The best article about Choice Overload is still this one showing that it's all p-hacked.

Tweet card media

p-Curve and Effect Size: Correcting for Publication Bias Using Only Significant Results - Uri...

Journals tend to publish only statistically significant evidence, creating a scientific record that markedly overstates the size of effects. We provide a new to...

journals.sagepub.com

2

4

38

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

2 years

Clarification: Obviously intentions and morality matter but they don't make it not p-hacking. The researcher can't say, "well I'm a good person and I can easily justify these post-hoc analyses, therefore this isn't p-hacking." It doesn't work like that.

2

1

38

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

1 year

I don't understand why everyone is always dumping on the one field that (a) replicates its findings, (b) publishes the data, and (c) provides evidence that tests of inference are truly preplanned. Psychology seems to be the best field of science--not the worst.

3

1

39

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

2 years

A link for those who don't know:

Tweet card media

A Famous Honesty Researcher Is Retracting A Study Over Fake Data

Renowned psychologist Dan Ariely literally wrote the book on dishonesty. Now some are questioning whether the scientist himself is being dishonest.

www.buzzfeednews.com

1

1

37

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

4 years

@khanacademy Gardening 100%. I'd spend the year outside.

1

0

36

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

1 year

I believe that Michel Pham is wrong in his latest attempt to downplay the problem of p-hacking in marketing. In response, I've shown how he likely p-hacked his obviously impossible claims that students can be primed to predict stocks and weather.

Tweet card media

Reviewing Pham's "feeling the future" paper to illustrate how easy it is to unintentionally p-hack...

Context: Michel Pham has responded to Krefeld-Schwalb and Scheibehenne (2022) “Tighter Nets for Smaller Fishes” paper in a way that I believe fails to acknowledge how widespread p-hacking is and how...

1

4

33

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

2 years

This is p-hacking. Intentions and moral upbringing of the researchers are irrelevant--though all considered themselves good people and thought they were (mostly) playing by the rules.

1

2

35

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

2 years

Q: How much work does it take to clean up bad science? A: Way too much! Exhibit A from the hostility primining lit:

Tweet media one

1

7

35

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

7 months

Journal of Consumer Research: "We surveyed the 3% of academics who benefit the most from the current system and most of them say they like it fine how it is"

Tweet media one

1

4

34

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

3 years

A replication tracker for marketing. Hope you find it useful. Thanks to @ignaziano @tuncaburak @nielsvandeven @realmehmetokan for help finding these replication studies. 10/14 are @DataColada projects.

Tweet media one

4

19

35

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

3 years

@jpsimmon Fascinating! There appears to be some conflict with Footnote 14 (Dan Ariely miscoded a variable) and Dan's statement (Dan didn't touch the data; only the insurance company did). I would be interested to learn more for sure!

1

0

33

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

2 years

I just added an "original journal" column to the Marketing Replication Tracker to make it easier to see this.

Tweet card media

Replications of Marketing Studies - Open MKT

1

2

33

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

11 months

Still early to tell what's going on here but it does look like the fall of academic fraudster Francesca Gino has exposed another data anomalist--not Dan Ariely this time. The paper is to be retracted due to problems with data that Gino never touched.

@stephaniemlee

Stephanie M. Lee

11 months

Here's what's been shared so far about the paper that is reportedly being retracted, as well as Gino's response.

Tweet media one

1

1

15

3

4

34

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

11 months

@Chris_Said Like vaccines-autism fraudster, Andrew Wakefield, they must have gotten into Alzheimer's research thinking "I will succeed where others have failed," but then instead of succeeding, they just start pretending. Sad.

2

0

31

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

1 year

This is not surprising given Greg Francis' critique of the article immediately after it was published.

Tweet media one

1

3

31

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

1 year

Thank you to whomever nominated for this award, and thank you to the voters. Very cool honor!

Resources for Marketers - Open MKT

Research. Open MKT provides context about scientific studies published in marketing and consumer behavior journals, covering issues such as replicability, systemic bias, retractions, and a list of...

@improvingpsych

SIPS (Account Archived - See Bio)

@improvingpsych

1 year

is aimed at increasing transparency & evidence quality in marketing research. . Aaron would like to thank all the replicators, meta-analysts, open science proponents & anonymous data sleuths for giving them material! @aaroncharlton

2

0

11

2

0

30

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

2 years

Where have we seen that pattern before? This is also the pattern you'd expect to emerge when you have systemic p-hacking. @andre_quentin wrote an excellent blog post describing the phenomenon:

Tweet media one

4

1

28

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

3 years

I just got back 3 negative reviews on this paper. It is very critical of the field of marketing and the powers that be of course don't recognize they have a problem so I shouldn't be surprised. They didn't ask me to respond to their critique but here I go anyway. 🧵

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

3 years

The bulk of mediation test CIs in marketing just barely exclude zero. That's not good for evidence quality. Here is a draft of my analysis with @AmandaKMontoya , John Price and @JoeHilgard . Your feedback is most welcome! 🧵

3

12

49

5

8

30

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

7 months

She claims a bad actor must have faked up the data to frame her. The problem is that these data sets helped her become rich and famous over a period of several years. Why would the bad actor want that? And different teams of RAs and coauthors worked on each project.

1

0

28

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

3 years

Oh wow! If you want to see some effect sizes shrink, try running a preregistered replication! That's another failed marketing replication on the right (Johnson, Bellman & Lohse 2002).

Tweet media one

2

8

28

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

1 year

I've just reordered the emails to be in order of when they were sent rather than in order of when they were posted to EJMR. Thanks to @RemyLevin for the suggestion.

1

0

31

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

2 years

The editors of JCR have just put out a very sensible, logical piece about relevance but it doesn't make a ton of sense in light of the non-replicability of the journal's articles. It'd be much better if they had also addressed the non-replicability issue.

@DrGiesler

Markus Giesler

2 years

Relevance—Reloaded and Recoded @JCRNEWS @drgiesler @jcotte @AndrewTStephen @DrStacyWood

1

5

38

1

1

28

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

1 year

I've been seeing a lot of fraudsters (or possibly just one fraudster with different monikers) whining about me and Data Colada and making up lies about us on EJMR. I'm totally fine with that but my only request is that we be referred to as AC/DC.

2

0

25

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

7 months

She provided zero emails with someone else sending her the fake data, zero emails in which she granted someone else access to her accounts or computer, zero evidence that anyone ever accessed her computer or her Qualtrics account.

1

1

25

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

3 years

Can anyone help me identify psych/marketing experimental procedures that there is strong reason to believe never took place (and probably are impossible)? My lab is trying to see if any of them can be recreated this spring. I'll post the ones I'm aware of in the replies.

8

9

24

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

5 months

This is great! A sensible discussion of replication in Journal of Consumer Research. Love to see it! How can you build a cumulative science without independent replication of findings? @OlegUrminsky

Taking the Full Measure: Integrating Replication into Research Practice to Assess Generalizability

Abstract. In this article, we review the ways in which replication has been and could be featured in consumer behavior, using Journal of Consumer Research

academic.oup.com

1

3

23

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

2 years

When @lakens comes up with a new bureaucratic process I feel like he pictures himself being in charge of it. I would be fine with that but I actually picture this guy heading it up.

Tweet media one

2

0

23

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

1 year

@doughertyorama & Horne (2022) supplemental materials: 1) P-values in marketing look very bad compared to every field of psychology 2) Negative correlation between impact factor and p-value quality in marketing

Tweet media one

3

5

23

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

1 year

What's worse? A field with a huge replication crisis or a field where we have no earthly idea if anything is replicable. Do we just assume a field's studies are replicable until proven otherwise?

Tweet media one

4

2

24

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

3 years

I noticed some conflicts between Dan Ariely's statement and other facts of the fraud case that was just exposed (Data Colada #98 ). Thought I would highlight those here. Fascinating case. I look forward to hearing more about it.

6

3

22

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

2 years

Fact check: At least partly true. When I discovered universal p-hacking in marketing it closed a lot of doors for me. Luckily I had a better opportunity come up in industry though. C'est la vie.

Tweet media one

5

2

23

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

2 years

I added a page to about bias detection studies. There have been a lot of recent ones that are either marketing-specific or overlapping with marketing. In total there are 6 that have field-level implications and 4 that are narrower.

Tweet media one

3

4

24

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

1 year

@stephaniemlee Gino's assertion here is false. Both of these observations were part of a block of #'s that were all out of sequence.

Tweet media one

6

1

21

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

2 years

This excellent study adds quite a bit of context to the growing list of bias studies in marketing: and to the unusually low level of replicability we see in marketing research (11.6% so far):

Tweet media one

0

0

22

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

1 year

The "fraud triangle" helps explain why academia is the perfect incubator for fraud. -Nobody is checking your data or replicating your work. -You are led to believe that you're a failure if you don't get that job at an R1. -You think "it's all nonsense anyway, so why not..."

Tweet media one

0

8

23

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

1 year

Here is the only function you need to know to get in to the AMA Marketing Hall of Fame. Follow me for more tips!

Tweet media one

3

0

23

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

1 year

Since we're on a Dan Ariely theme, here is a thread of all of the articles tagged with "Dan Ariely" on .

Tweet media one

3

4

22

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

11 months

When you're a marketing or management professor and you find out that at least 4 of your main coauthors are fraudsters and the rest of your papers are p-hacked.

1

1

21

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

3 years

Great quotes from Diederick Stapel describing the disenchantment that led to fraud.

Tweet media one

Tweet media two

Tweet media three

2

8

22

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

1 year

Including this new replication, Marketing/Consumer Behavior replications have been successful 11.4% of the time.

Tweet media one

1

11

21

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

3 years

Journal of Marketing has never retracted an article to my knowledge. But they had a Ping Dong paper, which posed a problem since her papers were getting retracted everywhere thanks to @lakens , @LisaDeBruine and others. Hmmm...what to do.

Tweet media one

2

6

21

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

2 years

@giladfeldman From an outsider's perspective, which I was never able to shake off despite years in academia, it's absurd that there aren't systems in place to independently check whether studies replicate. Now that I work in healthcare I'm learning that the same problem extends to drug trials.

0

0

20

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

1 year

If you can't read the emails in the blog post try clicking on them.

1

0

24

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

3 years

@PsychoSchmitt As long as we're all inventing alternative realities, here's mine ;)

Tweet media one

0

3

20

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

2 years

2022 Marketing Metascience Year in Review #openscience Highlights follow🧵

Tweet media one

1

11

20

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

2 years

Theoretically/mathematically you can argue that high p-values might be okay (.01 < p < .10). In practice, though, they're very uncommon in studies that report true effects.

What kind of p-values should we expect from true effects? - Open MKT

There has been a lot of discussion around what is mathematically, theoretically possible in terms of p-values. If you have .01 < p < .05 is that mathematically possible for true effects? Yes. Can you...

2

3

21

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

7 months

Francesca Gino, a Harvard professor fired for fraud, tries to blame co-author Nina Mazar, data sleuth Joe Simmons, her research assistants and a computer program for the various fake data sets she used to become rich and famous. Why not include aliens as well?

@stephaniemlee

Stephanie M. Lee

7 months

🚨 SCOOP: Here’s the unsealed, 1,300-page report showing how Harvard Business School concluded that dishonesty expert Francesca Gino committed research misconduct.

15

131

456

1

6

26

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

3 years

This cool chart shows # of retractions from each marketing journal (all time). The most interesting thing is not what you see, but what you don't see. None of @ama_journals ' publications appears on the chart (JM, JMR, JPPM, JInternationalM).

Tweet media one

1

4

20

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

1 year

Yet the flawed article went on to have a huge impact, not only in terms of citations (see below) but also by flaming the fires of the class war/populism movement.

Tweet media one

1

2

20

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

1 year

Fraudsters: I'm not a fraud--I'm just incompetent. And all this problematic work was done by unnamed, uncredited low-wage student workers. I don't even do my own research. Academia: Okay, we will promote you and give you funding and fancy titles then.

0

0

20

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

1 year

"Manuscript is full of facts, and as you obviously are aware, we only publish p-hacked nonsense in this journal. Desk Reject."

1

1

20

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

1 year

Scientific journal with 3.4% replication rate refuses to retract deeply anomalous papers by associate editor

Tweet card media

Scientific journal with 3.4% replication rate refuses to retract deeply anomalous papers by...

The Journal of Consumer Research (JCR) is widely considered to be the most prestigious journal in consumer behavior, a sub-field of marketing. Despite perceptions of prestige, JCR is plagued with...

3

7

20

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

1 year

Science will be stuck in the dark ages until editors learn what a conflict of interest is and how to avoid it. @ignaziano

Tweet media one

2

0

20

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

2 years

Study 1 (secondary data): A miniscule effect was found in some secondary survey data. The researchers paid little attention to the size of the effect. In hindsight, because the data was from a huge survey it could have been just some kind of response bias.

1

0

18

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

11 months

Lol PNAS again. Is there a rule that the more prestigious a journal is, the less serious it must be about science?

@DebiecJacek

Jacek Debiec MD, PhD, DPhil 🌎

11 months

The PNAS published an article. 1/4 of the 1st page are disclosures of the conflicts of interest. The 1st author owns the U.S. Patent No. US20070287753A1 on the product discussed in the article. Should PNAS label the article as an advertisement feature or sponsored content?

Tweet media one

3

10

43

3

4

19

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

3 years

Disruptive innovation right there. @Meta_Psy is quickly becoming one of the most trusted journals in social science IMO.

@ceptional

@alexh.bsky.social Holcombe

3 years

The peer review report for this manuscript is in preparation. For those not familiar with @Meta_Psy , our diamond open access journal, we use open peer review, require open code, and check that we can reproduce the results by re-running the analysis code.

0

3

18

1

6

19

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

2 years

By my count there are now 9 bias studies that show direct evidence of massive, systemic bias in the marketing literature. I've just updated the list:

Tweet media one

1

7

19

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

2 years

#OpenScience people might want to avoid Psych Bull until they fix this glitch.

@Tedo_

Ted Schwaba

2 years

@dsquintana Psych bull! :(

Tweet media one

1

0

12

1

5

19

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

3 years

Fact: Noise mining is a big problem in marketing research right now Seriously, our replication rate is 9% --> If you are interested in learning more, check out my 2021 #marketing #metascience year in review.

Tweet media one

3

4

19

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

2 years

Another failed replication that can't be explained by p-hacking, publication bias, HARKing, or low power. A good question is "how did the authors get d=.98, F=40, p-value = 0.000000000925477 with a counterintuitive, nonreplicable effect?" Is it impolite to ask?

@ZoeZiani

Zoé Ziani, Ph.D.

2 years

3) When asked to write about a time they felt physically dirty, people do recall more cleansing-related words. However, this “maximum positive control” ( @JoeHilgard , 2021) gives an effect (d=.51) that is twice as small as the original effect of networking in CGK 2014 (d=.98).

Tweet media one

1

1

14

4

4

18

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

11 months

Go home PNAS.

@ignaziano

Ignazio Ziano

11 months

PNAS is drunk again

Tweet media one

1

10

47

2

2

18

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

1 year

Following a failure to replicate, "Super Size Me" paper turns out to be full of numerical inconsistencies. @ignaziano @burakretired

Following a failure to replicate, "Super Size Me" paper turns out to be full of numerical inconsi...

When Tunca, Ziano and Xu (2022) set out to replicate Dubois et al. (2012), they had no idea that their efforts would lead to the original authors requesting retraction of the original study. The...

1

3

18

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

3 years

First of six teams here trying to replicate Wansink's red potato chips. I've not heard of any "great success!" stories yet but it looks like (1) color is easy, (2) shape requires deviating (a mold is needed), (3) they shrink 1/8" all around and (4) flavor is lost.

@daniellesigmann

Danielle Sigman ❥

@daniellesigmann

3 years

In my Marketing research class at ISU taught by @AaronCharlton , my classmates and I put in the effort to try and replicate the “Red Chip”. Below are some of our best outcomes. Click the link to read more about our project & to see if we were successful.

Tweet media one

Tweet media two

0

1

6

3

1

18

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

5 months

No, the problems with Brian Wansink's experiments are (a) fraud and (b) p-hacking. The findings should all be considered false until proven otherwise.

Tweet media one

3

2

17

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

3 years

I just wrote a blog post about teaching #ConsumerBehavior following/during the replication crisis. I've included content from @giladfeldman , @ignaziano , and some of my own stuff. Plz comment with more ideas! cc @mauripalm

Tweet media one

2

6

18

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

2 years

This paper claims that if you discuss some topics with people, you are then just as able to predict their attitudes on topics *not discussed* as you are able to guess their attitudes on the topics you did discuss with them. 🤨

Tweet media one

1

3

16

@AaronCharlton

Aaron Charlton

3 years

@SebastianDeri Couldn't figure out how to do it in R so I just don't file.

0

0

16