| Autor: |
Primbs MA; Behavioural Science Institute, Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands max.primbs@ru.nl hannah.peetz@ru.nl, https://max-primbs.netlify.app/., Dudda LA; Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University Medical Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands l.a.dudda@umcutrecht.nl.; University Medical Center Utrecht Brain Center, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands., Andresen PK; Department of Methodology & Statistics, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands p.k.andresen@uu.nl., Buchanan EM; Harrisburg University of Science and Technology, Harrisburg, PA, USA ebuchanan@harrisburgu.edu, https://www.aggieerin.com/., Peetz HK; Behavioural Science Institute, Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands max.primbs@ru.nl hannah.peetz@ru.nl, https://max-primbs.netlify.app/., Silan M; Annecy Behavioral Science Lab, Menthon Saint Bernard, France MiguelSilan@gmail.com.; Développement, individu, processus, handicap, éducation (DIPHE), Université Lumière Lyon 2, Bron Cedex, France., Lakens D; Human-Technology Interaction Group, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, The Netherlands D.Lakens@tue.nl, https://sites.google.com/site/lakens2. |
| Abstrakt: |
We expect that consensus meetings, where researchers come together to discuss their theoretical viewpoints, prioritize the factors they agree are important to study, standardize their measures, and determine a smallest effect size of interest, will prove to be a more efficient solution to the lack of coordination and integration of claims in science than integrative experiments. |
