No effect of distance priming on calorie estimates (#147)

Return to View Chart

How to Cite this Report

APA Style

Sarah Sykes, Stephanie Santini, Junie Carriere, Chelsea Carr Kinnear, Marie Chatelain, Angela Chieco, & Lionel Standing. No effect of distance priming on calorie estimates. (2013, January 18). Retrieved 16:11, October 22, 2017 from http://www.PsychFileDrawer.org/replication.php?attempt=MTQ3

MLA Style

"No effect of distance priming on calorie estimates" Sarah Sykes, Stephanie Santini, Junie Carriere, Chelsea Carr Kinnear, Marie Chatelain, Angela Chieco, & Lionel Standing. 18 Jan 2013 14:15 22 Oct 2017, 16:11 <http://www.PsychFileDrawer.org/replication.php?attempt=MTQ3>

MHRA Style

'No effect of distance priming on calorie estimates', Sarah Sykes, Stephanie Santini, Junie Carriere, Chelsea Carr Kinnear, Marie Chatelain, Angela Chieco, & Lionel Standing, , 18 January 2013 14:15 <http://www.PsychFileDrawer.org/replication.php?attempt=MTQ3> [accessed 22 October 2017]

Chicago Style

"No effect of distance priming on calorie estimates", Sarah Sykes, Stephanie Santini, Junie Carriere, Chelsea Carr Kinnear, Marie Chatelain, Angela Chieco, & Lionel Standing, , http://www.PsychFileDrawer.org/replication.php?attempt=MTQ3 (accessed October 22, 2017)

CBE/CSE Style

No effect of distance priming on calorie estimates [Internet]. Sarah Sykes, Stephanie Santini, Junie Carriere, Chelsea Carr Kinnear, Marie Chatelain, Angela Chieco, & Lionel Standing; 2013 Jan 18, 14:15 [cited 2017 Oct 22]. Available from: http://www.PsychFileDrawer.org/replication.php?attempt=MTQ3

Reference to Original Report of Finding
Title No effect of distance priming on calorie estimates
If the original article contained multiple experiments, which one did you attempt to replicate? e.g., you might respond 'Study 1' or 'Experiment 4'. Study 3
Link to PDF of Original Report
Brief Statement of Original Result Williams and Bargh predicted in Study 3 that priming subjects with the idea of distance (rather than closeness) would cause them to give lower estimates of the calories in unhealthy, hence dangerous foods. By contrast, calorie estimates wi
Type of Replication Attempted Highly Direct Replication
Result Type Failure to Replicate
Difference? Opposite Direction, .29
Number of Subjects 60
Number of Subjects in Original Study 59
Year in which Replication Attempt was Made 2012
Name of Investigators (Real Names Required) Sarah Sykes, Stephanie Santini, Junie Carriere, Chelsea Carr Kinnear, Marie Chatelain, Angela Chieco, & Lionel Standing
Detailed Description of Method/Results Method
The exact same procedures were followed, using 60 female subjects. Separate groups of subjects were primed with near, intermediate or far distances, using the same Cartesian plane, and then estimated the calories in 5 healthy and 5 unhealthy foods, randomly mixed in a list.

Results
The mean calories (SD) estimated for the 2 food types and 3 priming conditions were:

UNHEALTHY FOOD
Closeness 1278 (403)
Intermediate 1465 (541)
Distance 1350 (1019)

HEALTHY FOOD
Closeness 526 (227)
Intermediate 696 (301)
Distance 729 (582)

(All n = 20)

A 2x3 mixed ANOVA showed no effect of priming closeness on calorie estimates, F(2, 57) = .60, p .55. Nor was there any interaction between food type and priming, F (2, 57) = .86, p = .43.

A oneway ANOVA for the unhealthy foods only show no effect of prime distance, F(, 57) = 0.35, p = .70. Comparing the near and distant primes only, for the unhealthy foods, again no difference was found, t (38) = .29, p = .77.

These results contradict the findings of the target paper, since distance as compared to closeness-priming actually produced a (nonsignificant) increase in estimated calories for unhealthy food.

Healthy foods were estimated to have few calories than unhealthy foods, F (2, 57) = 197.8, p < .01.

Any Known Methodological Differences
(between original and present study)?
We used female subjects only, because many males have little familiarity with calories
Email of Investigator
Name of individuals who
actually carried out the project
L.Standing analyzed the data; the remaining authors ran the subjects
Location of ProjectNicolls 316, Bishop's University
Characteristics of Subjects
(subject pool, paid, etc.)
University students from subject pool
Unpaid
Where did these subjects reside?Canada
Was this a Class Project?Yes
Further Details of Results as pdf PDF

Additional Comments
Email of Original Investigator
Quantitive Information Williams & Bargh found an effect size of d = .90 for the effect of priming distance.\r\n\r\nThe power in our study was calculated as .968 to detect a difference of this size at the .05 level (one-tail
I have complied with ethical standards for experimentation on human beings and, if necessary, have obtained appropriate permission from an Institutional Review Board or other oversight group.
TAG: Attention TAG: JDM TAG: Language TAG: Learning TAG: Memory TAG: Perception TAG: Performance TAG: Problem Solving TAG: Social Cognition TAG: Social Psychology TAG: Thinking

Are you posting an unpublished replication attempt that you conducted yourself, or noting a published replication attempt?

Post Unpublished
Post Published