Emily Hembacher

Emily Hembacher

Auto-generated profile, based on publicly available information

Emily Hembacher

Department of Psychology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

7Years (2020-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
6 January 2021 in Royal Society Open Science
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
THTom E. Hardwicke
Tom E. Hardwicke
MBManuel Bohn
Manuel Bohn
KMKyle MacDonald
Kyle MacDonald
EHEmily Hembacher
Emily Hembacher
MNMichèle B. Nuijten
Michèle B. Nuijten
MFMichael C. Frank
Michael C. Frank
For any scientific report, repeating the original analyses upon the original data should yield the original outcomes. We evaluated analytic reproducibility in 25 Psychological Science articles awarded open data badges between 2014 and 2015. Initially, 16 (64%, 95% confidence interval [43,81]) articles contained at least one ‘major numerical discrepancy' (>10% difference) prompting us to request input from original authors. Ultimately, target values were reproducible without author involvement for 9 (36% [20,59]) articles; reproducible with author involvement for 6 (24% [8,47]) articles; not fully reproducible with no substantive author response for 3 (12% [0,35]) articles; and not fully reproducible despite author involvement for 7 (28% [12,51]) articles. Overall, 37 major numerical discrepancies remained out of 789 checked values (5% [3,6]), but original conclusions did not appear affected. Non-reproducibility was primarily caused by unclear reporting of analytic procedures. These results highlight that open data alone is not sufficient to ensure analytic reproducibility.

7 August 2020 in Child Development
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
EHEmily Hembacher
Emily Hembacher
BDBenjamin Demayo
Benjamin Demayo
MFMichael C. Frank
Michael C. Frank

1 January 2020 in Collabra: Psychology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
EHEmily Hembacher
Emily Hembacher
MFMichael C. Frank
Michael C. Frank
Parenting behaviors and decisions play an important role in determining children’s early environment. Are these behaviors driven by an intuitive theory of parenting – a coherent set of beliefs about child development and parent-child relationships? In exploratory work, we asked adults on Amazon Mechanical Turk to endorse a set of propositions about parenting and conducted exploratory factor analyses of their responses. Three distinct factors appeared in responses: an Affection and Attachment factor, an Early Learning factor, and a Rules and Respect factor. In an iterative process, we created a scale of items with subscales designed to measure these factors, which we call the Early Parenting Attitudes Questionnaire (EPAQ). We next conducted two studies with groups of parents (on Mechanical Turk and from the membership of a local museum) to estimate the validity of the new scale. We asked whether agreement with each subscale varied based on demographic factors and whether intuitive theories predicted self-reported parenting behaviors. The EPAQ provides an instrument to assess attitudes about parenting and child development, facilitating investigation of and intervention on parenting behaviors.