Is there selection bias in laboratory experiments? The case of social and risk preferences
Has this study been replicated?
The atlas records 2 reproductions of this study. Recorded outcomes: 1 mixed, 1 failed.
Reproductions
- Reproduction (with author data & code): Cleave et al. (2013, Experimental Economics), Fox et al. (2020). OSF. Outcome recorded: computationally reproducible, robustness not checked.
Computational: "Analyst was able to reproduce the results after the extended PBR attempt – A statistically significant association (p < .01)... 4.3 percent less likely to select into the lab."
Outcome read from Computational: Reproduction result. View paper - Analysis, Parsons et al. (2026). Outcome recorded: computational issues, robustness not checked.
Computational: All three claims produced numeric results (e.g. coefficient -.0889374, p=0.252 vs original -0.093, p=0.16) but none met the precise or approximate reproduction criteria in the tables ("Based on these criteria, the claim did not reproduce").
Outcome read from Computational: per-claim Reproduction outcome statements + Table 0/1/2.
Cite this record
Cleave, B. L., Nikiforakis, N., & Slonim, R. (2013). Is there selection bias in laboratory experiments? The case of social and risk preferences. Experimental Economics, 16(3), 372–382. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10683-012-9342-8
Other studies in the atlas
Failed replications · Successful replications · All browse pages