↓ Skip to main content

Can race really be erased? A pre-registered replication study

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
56 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Can race really be erased? A pre-registered replication study
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, September 2014
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01035
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wouter Voorspoels, Annelies Bartlema, Wolf Vanpaemel

Abstract

WHEN ENCOUNTERING AN UNKNOWN INDIVIDUAL, SOCIAL CATEGORIZATION OF THE INDIVIDUAL HAS BEEN SHOWN TO AUTOMATICALLY PROCEED ON THE BASIS OF THREE FUNDAMENTAL DIMENSIONS: People seem to mandatorily encode race, sex and age. In contradiction to this general finding, Kurzban et al. (2001) showed that race encoding is not automatic and inevitable, but rather a byproduct of categorization in terms of coalitions. In particular, they argue and empirically support that when other coalitional information is present, the encoding of race is spectacularly reduced. In the present contribution, we present a replication of the race-erased effect reported by Kurzban et al. First, we give a detailed overview of the hypotheses, the experimental methodology, the derivation of the sample size required to achieve a power of 95%, and the criteria that need to be met for a successful replication. Then we present the findings of an empirical test that met the requirements of our power analyses. Our results indicate that the encoding of race is indeed reduced when another coalitional cue is available, yet this reduction is less marked than in the original study. This experiment was preregistered before data collection at Open Science Framework, osf.io/vnhrm/.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 56 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 2%
Hungary 1 2%
Unknown 45 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 23%
Researcher 8 17%
Professor 7 15%
Student > Bachelor 4 9%
Student > Master 4 9%
Other 8 17%
Unknown 5 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 27 57%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Computer Science 2 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 4%
Neuroscience 2 4%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 7 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 55. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 April 2022.
All research outputs
#831,217
of 26,555,952 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#1,767
of 35,497 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,697
of 246,783 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#26
of 364 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,555,952 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 35,497 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 246,783 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 364 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.