A multilab preregistered replication of the ego-depletion effect.

Hagger, M. S., Chatzisarantis, N. L. D., Alberts, H., Anggono, C. O., Batailler, C., Birt, A. R., Brand, R., et al. (2016). A multilab preregistered replication of the ego-depletion effect. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 11(4), 546-573.

Type

Journal article

Intellectual base

Primary research

Year

2016

Volume

11

Issue

4

Pages

546-573

DOI

10.1177/1745691616652873

DOI registrant

SAGE Publications

Link

https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691616652873

Cited from

psychology

Cited by

2 citations across 2 artifacts.

Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.

Primes

• Decision Fatigue
  • The construct remains contested at the mechanistic level despite field-level robustness.

    This source23-lab, 2,141-participant registered replication that failed to find the ego-depletion effect.

    Supported in partVerified against the publisher's abstract

    Hagger et al. 2016 supplies the replication-crisis basis for contesting the resource-depletion mechanism, but reports a near-zero multilab effect, not field-level robustness.

    “Although a meta-analysis of ego-depletion experiments found a medium-sized effect, subsequent meta-analyses have questioned the size and existence of the effect and identified instances of possible bias.”

    Read by an automated reader; not a human review. How support was checked

Domain-specific

• Funnel Plot Asymmetry
  • A subsequent large multi-lab registered replication found no reliable depletion effect, consistent with the funnel's warning.

    This sourceThe Registered Replication Report — 23 laboratories, N = 2,141 — finding an ego-depletion effect of d = 0.04, 95% CI [-0.07, 0.15], and naming the bias-flagging meta-analyses as the catalyst for the replication.

    SupportedVerified against the source

    Read by an automated reader; not a human review. How support was checked

Verification

Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.

Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 2 of 2 citations: 1 supported, 1 supported in part. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.

Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.

See how references were verified.

Registry ID ref:7c4b4fdae8e6 · see in the full table