Correction: How do psychology researchers interpret the results of multiple replication studies?

Olmo R van den Akker; Jelte M Wicherts; Linda Dominguez Alvarez; Marjan Bakker; Marcel A L M van Assen

doi:10.3758/s13423-025-02687-5

Correction: How do psychology researchers interpret the results of multiple replication studies?

Olmo R van den Akker^*
, Jelte M Wicherts
, Linda Dominguez Alvarez
, Marjan Bakker
, Marcel A L M van Assen

^*Corresponding author for this work

Tilburg University

Research output: Contribution to journal › Comment/Letter to the editor › Academic

Abstract

In the abstract of this paper, in the last sentence, the word overestimate should have been underestimate. So the correct final sentence of the abstract is: “Our studies demonstrate that many psychology researchers underestimate the evidence in favor of a theory if one or more results from a set of replication studies are statistically significant, highlighting the need for better statistical education.”

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	2430
Journal	Psychonomic bulletin & review
Volume	32
Issue number	5
Early online date	7 Apr 2025
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-025-02687-5
Publication status	Published - 2025

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2025.

Access to Document

10.3758/s13423-025-02687-5Licence: CC BY

s13423-025-02687-5Final published version, 439 KBLicence: CC BY

Cite this

@article{c2e18f5d02cb41caa2b6e39b1668949f,

title = "Correction: How do psychology researchers interpret the results of multiple replication studies?",

abstract = "In the abstract of this paper, in the last sentence, the word overestimate should have been underestimate. So the correct final sentence of the abstract is: {\textquotedblleft}Our studies demonstrate that many psychology researchers underestimate the evidence in favor of a theory if one or more results from a set of replication studies are statistically significant, highlighting the need for better statistical education.{\textquotedblright}",

author = "\{van den Akker\}, \{Olmo R\} and Wicherts, \{Jelte M\} and Alvarez, \{Linda Dominguez\} and Marjan Bakker and \{van Assen\}, \{Marcel A L M\}",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} The Author(s) 2025.",

year = "2025",

doi = "10.3758/s13423-025-02687-5",

language = "English",

volume = "32",

pages = "2430",

journal = "Psychonomic bulletin \& review",

issn = "1069-9384",

publisher = "Springer",

number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Correction

T2 - How do psychology researchers interpret the results of multiple replication studies?

AU - van den Akker, Olmo R

AU - Wicherts, Jelte M

AU - Alvarez, Linda Dominguez

AU - Bakker, Marjan

AU - van Assen, Marcel A L M

PY - 2025

Y1 - 2025

N2 - In the abstract of this paper, in the last sentence, the word overestimate should have been underestimate. So the correct final sentence of the abstract is: “Our studies demonstrate that many psychology researchers underestimate the evidence in favor of a theory if one or more results from a set of replication studies are statistically significant, highlighting the need for better statistical education.”

AB - In the abstract of this paper, in the last sentence, the word overestimate should have been underestimate. So the correct final sentence of the abstract is: “Our studies demonstrate that many psychology researchers underestimate the evidence in favor of a theory if one or more results from a set of replication studies are statistically significant, highlighting the need for better statistical education.”

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105002468338

U2 - 10.3758/s13423-025-02687-5

DO - 10.3758/s13423-025-02687-5

M3 - Comment/Letter to the editor

C2 - 40192922

SN - 1069-9384

VL - 32

SP - 2430

JO - Psychonomic bulletin & review

JF - Psychonomic bulletin & review

IS - 5

ER -

Correction: How do psychology researchers interpret the results of multiple replication studies?

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

How do psychology researchers interpret the results of multiple replication studies?

Cite this