@article{RodriguesNagowskiMusseletal.2018, author = {Rodrigues, Johannes and Nagowski, Natalie and Mussel, Patrick and Hewig, Johannes}, title = {Altruistic punishment is connected to trait anger, not trait altruism, if compensation is available}, series = {Heliyon}, volume = {4}, journal = {Heliyon}, number = {11}, doi = {10.1016/j.heliyon.2018.e00962}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-177669}, pages = {e00962}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Altruistic punishment and altruistic compensation are important concepts that are used to investigate altruism. However, altruistic punishment has been found to be correlated with anger. We were interested whether altruistic punishment and altruistic compensation are both driven by trait altruism and trait anger or whether the influence of those two traits is more specific to one of the behavioral options. We found that if the participants were able to apply altruistic compensation and altruistic punishment together in one paradigm, trait anger only predicts altruistic punishment and trait altruism only predicts altruistic compensation. Interestingly, these relations are disguised in classical altruistic punishment and altruistic compensation paradigms where participants can either only punish or compensate. Hence altruistic punishment and altruistic compensation paradigms should be merged together if one is interested in trait altruism without the confounding influence of trait anger.}, language = {en} } @article{PfisterSchwarz2018, author = {Pfister, Roland and Schwarz, Katharina A.}, title = {Should we pre-date the beginning of scientific psychology to 1787?}, series = {Frontiers in Psychology}, volume = {9}, journal = {Frontiers in Psychology}, number = {2481}, doi = {10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02481}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-177641}, year = {2018}, abstract = {No abstract available.}, language = {en} } @article{KrishnaPeter2018, author = {Krishna, Anand and Peter, Sebastian M.}, title = {Questionable research practices in student final theses - prevalence, attitudes, and the role of the supervisor's perceived attitudes}, series = {PLoS ONE}, volume = {13}, journal = {PLoS ONE}, number = {8}, doi = {10.1371/journal.pone.0203470}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-177296}, pages = {e0203470}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Although questionable research practices (QRPs) and p-hacking have received attention in recent years, little research has focused on their prevalence and acceptance in students. Students are the researchers of the future and will represent the field in the future. Therefore, they should not be learning to use and accept QRPs, which would reduce their ability to produce and evaluate meaningful research. 207 psychology students and fresh graduates provided self-report data on the prevalence and predictors of QRPs. Attitudes towards QRPs, belief that significant results constitute better science or lead to better grades, motivation, and stress levels were predictors. Furthermore, we assessed perceived supervisor attitudes towards QRPs as an important predictive factor. The results were in line with estimates of QRP prevalence from academia. The best predictor of QRP use was students' QRP attitudes. Perceived supervisor attitudes exerted both a direct and indirect effect via student attitudes. Motivation to write a good thesis was a protective factor, whereas stress had no effect. Students in this sample did not subscribe to beliefs that significant results were better for science or their grades. Such beliefs further did not impact QRP attitudes or use in this sample. Finally, students engaged in more QRPs pertaining to reporting and analysis than those pertaining to study design. We conclude that supervisors have an important function in shaping students' attitudes towards QRPs and can improve their research practices by motivating them well. Furthermore, this research provides some impetus towards identifying predictors of QRP use in academia.}, language = {en} }