Replicability-Index

Improving the replicability of empirical research

Skip to content

About
Z-Curve.2.0
Z-Curve Webinar
Princeton Talk About Z-Curve
Z-Curve: An even better p-curve
Z-Curve Citations
False Psychology Glossary
A Meta-Psychological Perspective on the Decade of Replication Failures in Social Psychology
2022 Replicability Rankings of Psychology Journals
Replicability Rankings of Psychology Departments
Estimating the False Discovery Risk of Psychology Science
Personalized P-Values for Social/Personality Psychologists
A Meta-Scientific Perspective on “Thinking: Fast and Slow
Most published results in medical journals are not false
Replicability Reports of Psychology Journals

Search for:

Further reflections on the linearity in Dr. Förster’s Data

April 21, 2015UncategorizedUlrich Schimmack

The Jens Forster saga continues. Results are too good to be true, but how did this happen?

Share this:

Tweet

Like this:

Like Loading...

Post navigation

← The R-Index for 18 Multiple Study Articles in Science (Francis et al., 2014) Replacing p-values with Bayes-Factors: A Miracle Cure for the Replicability Crisis in Psychological Science →

Leave a ReplyCancel reply

Powered by WordPress.com.

Discover more from Replicability-Index

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Type your email…

Continue reading

%d