Table 1.

Results from different Bayes factor hypothesis tests for each of the nine experiments from Donnellan et al. (in press), as well as for the data collapsed over studies 1–4 and studies 5–9

	N	r	p	BF01	BF0+	BF0r(r orig = .57)	BF0r(r orig = .37)
Study 1	235	–0.06	0.35	7.90	22.59	16825.57	39.37
Study 2	480	–0.01	0.90	17.36	19.24	17679.82	47.45
Study 3	210	0.13	0.06	2.09	1.08	50.25	1.15
Study 4	228	–0.10	0.15	4.21	28.58	21904.40	35.05
Study 5	494	0.10	0.03	1.67	0.85	134.72	1.32
Study 6	553	0.08	0.06	3.13	1.61	398.01	2.98
Study 7	311	0.02	0.72	13.21	10.32	4894.19	23.76
Study 8	365	0.02	0.77	14.60	11.84	7002.82	28.75
Study 9	197	–0.13	0.07	2.17	30.86	21755.50	28.25
Study 1-4	1153	–0.03	0.31	16.17	52.21	49671.92	70.00
Study 5-9	1920	0.01	0.56	29.53	20.53	31021.07	70.36

Note: N is the total number of participants, r is the sample Pearson correlation coefficient between loneliness and the physical warmth index, p is the two-sided p value, BF₀₁ is the two-sided default Bayes factor in favor of ${\mathcal{\mathscr{H}}}_0$, BF₀₊ is the one-sided default Bayes factor in favor of ${\mathcal{\mathscr{H}}}_0$, BF_0r(.57) is the replication Bayes factor in favor of ${\mathcal{\mathscr{H}}}_0$ based on study 1a from Bargh and Shalev (2012) (featuring undergraduate participants, as in studies 1, 7, 8, and 9), and BF_0r(.37) is the replication Bayes factor in favor of ${\mathcal{\mathscr{H}}}_0$ based on study 1b from Bargh and Shalev (2012) (featuring participants from community samples, as in studies 2–6)