I will need to change one of my examples for the German cities task.

It is interesting that two of the data points in the small data set were from that part of Texas.

Nice paper w/ some great points. Maybe see Michel Regenwetter's papers on generalizing to "people." Other examples: Hershey & Shoemaker (1980, reflection effect) and - self-serving - one of mine (2016, do multiple plays eliminate certainty/possibility effects?). Still a role for btw-Ss exps, imho.

Wonderful paper! For more on purposive variation, see this 2022 paper on metastudies: journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/...

Free postprint: osf.io/preprints/ps...

It's like Simonsohn et al.'s new mix-and-match method, but with more attention to moderation, generalizability, and statistical power.

When completely described, the certain option includes a negation, as in "200 people will be saved and 400 people will not be saved."

Some theories have no place for such negations and so don't make clear predictions. Others predict no framing effect in choices between completely described options.

Here's the link:
www.npr.org/2025/04/16/n...

I was there! It was raining the whole time, and people were undeterred.

Free postprint on PsyArXiv:
osf.io/preprints/ps...

An appeal to anyone overseeing a "megastudy": Treat the whole thing like a big counterbalanced experiment (as in a "metastudy"; see the link), so you don't end up with some of the same problems as meta-analyses, such as having the features of the interventions being correlated and imbalanced.

Wonderful paper! At the risk of appearing/being self-serving, here are three papers on perceptions of energy and water use (not perceptions of others' beliefs) that used similar methods (mixed models):

www.pnas.org/doi/full/10....

www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...

www.pnas.org/doi/full/10....

Living liver donors as well, though not the topic of the film.

What source article are you talking about?

I don't know about love, but the movie dialog provides a great example of the sunk-cost effect, useful for teaching (or testing) JDM. Jason Alexander's character says something like, "Back out? Forget it, pal! We've got a thousand man-hours in on this."

BTW, we're running another one right now, using four scenarios where we found a significant effect in recent studies (in a particular condition) and four scenarios from earlier studies in which the authors found a nonsignificant effect in the same condition. The data are trickling in.

You might like the metastudies approach, with stimuli and other aspects of the design varied to learn about generalizability and boundary conditions: journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1...

We also have follow-ups for framing effects with extreme probabilities, somewhat risky options. See PsyArXiv.

Good advice for non-business psychological research as well. I especially like point 3, about the sampling of stimuli. I would add that we should also sample (or vary) other features of the design as well, to assess generalizability, as in the metastudies approach.