Living #20 | Many Co-Authors
Paper #20

Rosenblum, M; Schroeder, J; Gino, F (2020) 'Tell It Like It Is: When Politically Incorrect Language Promotes Authenticity' , Journal Of Personality And Social Psychology  


This page contains a summary table for data provenance for all studies in this paper. In addition, authors can share with readers information on why they decided to retract or not retract, plans and/or results for replication efforts, reflections on the process, or anything at all they feel is relevant. They may revise the information provided as often as desired, and each author is free to present a message of their own, though authors are encouraged to speak in one voice.

Aggregate responses

Gino involved in data collection?
Co-authors have/had raw data?
Data for reproducing results available?
Pilot study No (2)
N/A (2)
N/A (2)
Study 1 No (2)
N/A (2)
N/A (2)
Study 2 No (2)
N/A (2)
N/A (2)
Study 3 No (2)
N/A (2)
N/A (2)
Study 4 No (2)
N/A (2)
N/A (2)
Study 5 No (2)
N/A (2)
N/A (2)
Study 6 No (2)
N/A (2)
N/A (2)

Individual Responses

Michael Rosenblum
Gino involved in data collection? Co-authors have/had raw data? Data for reproducing results available?
Pilot studyNo----
Study 1No----
Study 2No----
Study 3No----
Study 4No----
Study 5No----
Study 6No----


Juliana Schroeder
Gino involved in data collection? Co-authors have/had raw data? Data for reproducing results available?
Pilot studyNo----
Study 1No----
Study 2No----
Study 3No----
Study 4No----
Study 5No----
Study 6No----



Below is a message written by author(s) of this paper. Keep in mind it may be modified at any time.
Written by: Juliana Schroeder
Last update: 2023-12-13

We conducted an internal audit of this paper, which can be found here: https://osf.io/jqky8

- Francesca Gino was not involved in collecting or analyzing the data for any of the studies in the paper.

- The raw data and materials were found for all studies.

- During the audit, two errors were discovered in the reported results of Experiments 4 and 6, which do not change the interpretation or statistical significance of results. (The error in Experiment 4 came from misreporting two Ms & SDs in the paper, and the error in Experiment 6 came from a mistake made when manually matching participants' survey data with their chat partners' survey data.)

- No other issues were identified in the audit that could affect the interpretation of results.

We have reported the errors to the JPSP editor and are in the process of issuing a correction. Given that the errors do not change the statistical significance of any of the results, we believe the findings from this paper are robust.

This statement has been read and approved by the following authors: Michael Rosenblum and Juliana Schroeder.

 

Update on 12/13/23: The paper correction has been submitted to the journal and is being processed.

Link to OSF website (with data and materials posted): https://osf.io/kvme3/