Reference health
Replicating Studies in Which Samples of Participants Respond to Samples of Stimuli
26/26 checkable references clean · checked 2026-09-17
Every reference with a DOI in the deposited reference list resolved to a known work in Crossref or DataCite at the dated check, and none carried a retraction, withdrawal, or removal notice.
11 without a DOI — not checked. A reference deposited without a DOI is never matched by title or guessed at; it stays outside the checked set, and this line discloses that.
The 26 checked references that resolve
resolves10.1016/j.jml.2007.12.005
Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items
resolves10.1016/s0022-5371(73)80014-3
The language-as-fixed-effect fallacy: A critique of language statistics in psychological research
resolves10.3758/s13423-012-0322-y
Publication bias and the failure of replication in experimental psychology
resolves10.1177/0956797611430953
Measuring the Prevalence of Questionable Research Practices With Incentives for Truth Telling
resolves10.1037/a0028347
Treating stimuli as a random factor in social psychology: A new and comprehensive solution to a pervasive but largely ignored problem.
resolves10.1177/1745691612462588
An Open, Large-Scale, Collaborative Effort to Estimate the Reproducibility of Psychological Science
resolves10.1037/a0029487
The ironic effect of significant results on the credibility of multiple-study articles.
resolves10.1037/a0015108
Shall we Really do it Again? The Powerful Concept of Replication is Neglected in the Social Sciences
resolves10.1037/xge0000014
Statistical power and optimal design in experiments in which samples of participants respond to samples of stimuli.
The 11 references without a DOI — listed, not checked
no DOI — not checkedPower failure: Why small sample size undermines the reliability shift
no DOI — not checkedref14
no DOI — not checkedQuantitative methods for social psychology
no DOI — not checkedref20
no DOI — not checkedRewarding replications: A sure and simple way to improve psychological science
no DOI — not checkedThe limits of direct replications and the virtues of stimulus sampling
no DOI — not checkedRegistered reports: A method to increase the credibility of published results
no DOI — not checkedScientific Utopia II. Restructuring incentives and practices to promote truth over publishability
no DOI — not checkedFalse-positive psychology undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant
no DOI — not checkedSmall Telescopes: Detectability and the Evaluation of Replication Results (SSRN Scholarly Paper No. ID 2259879)
no DOI — not checkedref34
What this badge says. CiteStamped means the CHECKABLE references of this
work were clean at the dated check: each resolved to a known work in a public registry, and none
carried a retraction notice at that time. It says nothing about the quality, findings,
or importance of the work itself, and nothing about references deposited without a DOI.
checked 2026-09-17 — re-checked daily as this page is visited; titles and statuses come from Crossref and DataCite and are not part of the signed record
Embed this badge
Both snippets point at the live badge image and link back to this page. The badge re-renders from the daily check, so an embed never goes stale by more than a day of visits.
<a href="https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.2139/ssrn.2449567"><img src="https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.2139/ssrn.2449567/badge.svg" alt="CiteStamped reference-health badge" width="460" height="64"></a>
[](https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.2139/ssrn.2449567)