No evidence for nudging after adjusting for publication bias - PubMed (original) (raw)

No evidence for nudging after adjusting for publication bias

Maximilian Maier et al. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2022.

No abstract available

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interest.

Figures

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1.

RoBMAPSMA model-averaged posterior mean effect size estimates with 95% credible intervals and Bayes factors for the absence of the effect for the combined sample or split by either the domain or intervention category (ignoring the clustering of SEs). BF01 quantifies evidence for the null hypothesis. BF01 larger than one corresponds to evidence in favor of the null hypothesis, and BF01 lower than one corresponds to evidence in favor of the alternative hypothesis (evidence for the alternative hypothesis can be obtained by reciprocating the Bayes factor; BF10 = 1/BF01). As a rule of thumb, Bayes factors between 3 and 10 indicate moderate evidence, and Bayes factors larger than 10 indicate strong evidence.

References

    1. Thaler R. H., Sunstein C. R., Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness (Yale University Press, 2008).
    1. Lin Y., Osman M., Ashcroft R., Nudge: Concept, effectiveness, and ethics. Basic Appl. Soc. Psych. 39, 293–306 (2017).
    1. Mertens S., Herberz M., Hahnel U. J. J., Brosch T., The effectiveness of nudging: A meta-analysis of choice architecture interventions across behavioral domains. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 119, e2107346118 (2022). -PMC -PubMed
    1. Vevea J. L., Woods C. M., Publication bias in research synthesis: Sensitivity analysis using a priori weight functions. Psychol. Methods 10, 428–443 (2005). -PubMed
    1. Doucouliagos C., Stanley T. D., Theory competition and selectivity: Are all economic facts greatly exaggerated? J. Econ. Surv. 27, 316–339 (2013).

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources