Show file names | |
Show file IDs | |
Show timestamps |
| AsPredicted #39682
| docx - Qualtrics Survey
| csv
csv - long format
csv - wide format
| R Code
| Study 1a Coding Instructions
| ||
| AsPredicted #50998
| docx - Qualtrics Survey
| csv
| R Code
| |||
| AsPredicted #69932
| docx - Qualtrics Survey
| csv
| R Code
| |||
| AsPredicted #47766
| docx - Qualtrics Survey, Main Survey
docx - Qualtrics Survey, Pre Survey
| csv
| R Code
| |||
| AsPredicted #58731
| docx - Qualtrics Survey
| csv
| R Code
| |||
| AsPredicted #52618
| docx - Qualtrics Survey
| csv
| R Code
| |||
| AsPredicted #64054
| docx - Qualtrics Survey
| csv
| R Code
|
Previewing files
Files can be previewed by clicking on descriptions.
Codebooks can be previewed by clicking on
Tell us if something is wrong with this Box
The authors have written the following message for visitors to this box.
Please note that these messages can be modified or deleted at any point (even after a box is made permanent)
Update August 2023:
Dear Reader,
We have conducted an internal audit of this research and remain confident in the findings. We have access to the raw data for every single study in Qualtrics (and Chatplat for Study 2). Using this raw data, we are able to replicate all of the results in the publication using the cleaning and analysis code files posted online.
All of the materials, pre-registrations, data and code associated with the original publication are available on this ResearchBox. The data posted here was subjected to some initial cleaning. We have now posted the raw data and cleaning code to get from the raw data outputs from Qualtrics to the cleaned data posted here on a separate OSF page: https://osf.io/h48fs/?view_only=181f87d7ced84f18841f7f766e300490.
Note that the "raw" data we are posting is missing any columns that are considered to be "identifiable information" by our IRB. This includes things such as IP Addresses, Latitude/Longitude, Prolific/MTurk IDs, and verbatim content of participant conversations.
If you have any additional questions, please do not hesitate to reach out to Hanne at hcollins@hbs.edu.
Best,
Hanne K. Collins
Charles A. Dorison
Julia A. Minson
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Reader,
Due to a coding error, in Study 4 we excluded data from an additional 75 participants who were matched with agreeing (rather than disagreeing) partners. We discovered this error prior to publication, but after making our ResearchBox public (and thus no longer editable). To reproduce the numbers in the manuscript, please add the code below to line 14 in the code file for Study 4.
If you have any additional questions, please do not hesitate to reach out to me at hcollins@hbs.edu.
Best,
Hanne
#-Correct coding error (some people saw an agreeing statement instead of disagreeing)
study4$attitude_check <- ifelse(study4$issue == "stem" & study4$stem > 4, "agree",
ifelse(study4$issue == "stem" & study4$stem < 4, "disagree",
ifelse(study4$issue == "isis" & study4$isis > 4, "agree",
ifelse(study4$issue == "isis" & study4$isis < 4, "disagree", NA))))
table(study4$attitude, study4$attitude_check, useNA = "ifany")
study4$attitude_match <- study4$attitude==study4$attitude_check
table(study4$attitude_match) #75 exclusions
study4$error_exclude <- ifelse(study4$attitude_match=="FALSE", 1, NA)
table(study4$error_exclude)
study4 <- study4[is.na(study4$error_exclude),]
This version: August 30, 2023