Edited Books:

Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M., Kühberger, A. & Johnson, J. (Eds.). (2018). A Handbook of Process Tracing Methods. New York: Taylor & Francis.

Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M., Kühberger, A. & Ranyard, R. (Eds.). (2011). A Handbook of Process Tracing Methods for Decision Research: A Critical Review and User’s Guide. New York: Taylor & Francis.

Published chapters and journal articles:

Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M., Kühberger, A., Gagl, S., & Hutzler, F. (in press). Inducing thought processes: Bringing process measures and cognitive processes closer together. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making.

Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M., Johnson, J.G., Böckenholt, U., Goldstein, D., Russo, J., Sullivan, N., &  Willemsen, M. (2017). Process tracing methods in decision making: On growing up in the 70ties. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26(5), 442-450.

Kühberger, A. & Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M. (2017). Economic decision making: risk, value and affect. In R. Ranyard (Ed.). Economic Psychology, 20-31. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd: Chichester, UK.

Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M., Spaanjaars, N.L., & Witteman, C.L.M. (2017). The (in)visibility of psychodiagnosticians’ expertise. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 30, 89-94.

Kieslich, P. J., Wulff, D. U., Henninger, F., Haslbeck, J. M. B., \& Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M. (2016). Mousetrap: An R package for processing and analyzing mouse-tracking data. CRAN.

Skvortsova, A., Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M., Jellema, S., Sanfey, A., & Witteman, C. (2016). Deliberative versus intuitive psychodiagnostic decision. Psychology7, 1438–1450.

Lejarraga, T., Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M., & Smedema, D. (2016). The pyeTribe: Simultaneous eyetracking for economic games. Behavior Research Methods.
Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M., & Kühberger, A. (2014). Out of sight – out of mind?  Information acquisition patterns in risky choice framing. Polish Psychological Bulletin, 45, 21–28.
Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M., Sohn, M., De Bellis, E., Martin, N., & Hertwig, R. (2013). A lack of appetite for information and computation. Simple heuristics in food choice. Appetite, 71, 242–251.
 Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M. & Murphy, R.O. (2012). Flashlight as an online process tracing method. In Z. Yan (Ed.). Encyclopedia of Cyber Behavior. (p. 88–95). IGI Global: Hershey, PA.
 Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M., Kühberger, A., & Ranyard, R. (2011). The Role of Process Data in the Development and Testing of Process Models of Judgment and Decision Making. Judgement and Decision Making, 6(8), 733–739.
 Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M., Murphy, R. O., & Hutzler, F. (2011). Flashlight: Recording Information Acquisition Online. Computers in human behavior, 27, 1771–1782.
Huber, O., Huber, O.W., & Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M. (2011). Determining the information participants need – Methods of Active Information Search. In M. Schulte-Mecklenbeck, A., Kühberger, A. & R. Ranyard (Eds.). A Handbook of Process Tracing Methods for Decision Research: A Critical Review and User’s Guide. New York: Taylor & Francis.
Kühberger, A., Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M., & Ranyard, R. (2011). Windows for understanding the mind: Introduction to A Handbook of Process Tracing Methods for Decision Research. In M. Schulte-Mecklenbeck, A., Kühberger, A. & R. Ranyard (Eds.). A Handbook of Process Tracing Methods for Decision Research: A Critical Review and User’s Guide. New York: Taylor & Francis.
 Norman, E. & Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M. (2009). Take a careful click at that! Mouselab and eye-tracking as tools to measure intuition. In: A. Glöckner & C. Witteman (Eds). Foundations for Tracing Intuition: Challenges and methods. London: Psychology Press.
 Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M., & Murphy, R.O. (2009). Prozessdaten online erheben: Verschiedene Methoden im Uberblick. In: N. Jackob, H. Schoen, & T. Zerback. Sozialforschung im Internet (p. 197–209). Wiesbaden, Verlag fur Sozialwissenschaften.
 Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M. (2008). Brave New World … Wide Web: Blending Old Teaching Methods With a Cutting-edge Virtual Learning Environment. In: B. Perlman,L.I. McCann, & S.H. McFadden. Lessons Learned (Vol. 3): Practical advice for the teaching of psychology (p. 109-118). Washington, Association for Psychological Science.
 Johnson, E.J., Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M., & Willemsen, M. (2008). Process Models deserve Process Data: Comment on Brandstätter, Gigerenzer, & Hertwig (2006). Psychological Review, 115(1), 263-272.
 Johnson, E.J., Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M., & Willemsen, M.C. (2008). Postscript: Rejoinder to Brandstätter, Gigerenzer, and Hertwig (2008). Psychological Review, 115, 1, 272-273.
Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M. (2007). Information processing as one key for a unification? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 30(1), 40 – 40.
Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M. (2006). Assessment durch Feedback. In: F. Gertsch (Ed.), Das Moodle Praxisbuch (S. 29 – 39). Munchen: Addison Wesley.
 Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M. (2006). Virtual Learning Environment. Planung und Durchführung einer webbasierten Übung in der Psychologie . In: S. Wehr (Ed.), Hochschullehre – adressatengerecht und wirkungsvoll (S. 57 – 92). Bern: Haupt Verlag.
 Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M., & Neun, M. (2005). WebDiP – a tool for information search experiments on the World-Wide-Web. Behavior Research Methods, 37(2), 293 – 300.
 Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M. (2005). Tracing the decision maker. Unpublished PhD Thesis. University of Fribourg, Switzerland.
 Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M. (2004). Brave New World … Wide Web. Blending Old Teaching Methods With a Cutting-edge Virtual Learning Environment. APS Observer, 17 (10), 48 – 53.
 Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M. & Huber, O. (2003). Information Search in the Laboratory and on the Web: With or Without an Experimenter. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 35(2), 227 – 235.
 Kühberger, A., Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M., & Perner, J. (2002). Framing decisions: hypothetical and real. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 89, 1162 – 1175.
 Kühberger, A., Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M., & Perner, J. (1999). The effect of probabilities and payoff on framing: A meta-analysis and an empirical test. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 78(3), 204 – 231.
 Schulte, M. (1998). Framing in real and hypothetical decision situations. Unpublished Master Thesis. University of Salzburg, Austria.
 Kühberger, A., Perner, J., Schulte, M., & Leingruber, R. (1995). Choice or No Choice. Is the Langer Effect Evidence against Simulation? Mind and Language, 10(4), 423 – 436.


Recent Posts

Professor priming – or not

This was my first contribution to a Registered Replication Report (RRR). Being one of 40 participating labs was an interesting exercise – it might seem straightforward to run the same study in different labs, but we learned that such small things as ü, ä and ö can generate a huge amount of problems and work (read this if you are into these kind of things).

Here is one of the central results:

So overall not a lot of action … our lab was actually the one with larges effect size (in the predicted direction).

Here is the abstract of the whole paper and here the Commentary by Ap Dijksterhuis naturally, he sees things a bit different …

Dijksterhuis and van Knippenberg (1998) reported that participants primed with an intelligent category (“professor”) subsequently performed 13.1% better on a trivia test than participants primed with an unintelligent category (“soccer hooligans”). Two unpublished replications of this study by the original authors, designed to verify the appropriate testing procedures, observed a smaller difference between conditions (2-3%) as well as a gender difference: men showed the effect (9.3% and 7.6%) but women did not (0.3% and -0.3%). The procedure used in those replications served as the basis for this multi-lab Registered Replication Report (RRR). A total of 40 laboratories collected data for this project, with 23 laboratories meeting all inclusion criteria. Here we report the meta-analytic result of those 23 direct replications (total N = 4,493) of the updated version of the original study, examining the difference between priming with professor and hooligan on a 30-item general knowledge trivia task (a supplementary analysis reports results with all 40 labs, N = 6,454). We observed no overall difference in trivia performance between participants primed with professor and those primed with hooligan (0.14%) and no moderation by gender.

  1. The root of the problem Leave a reply
  2. A short history of process tracing Leave a reply
  3. LaTeX <- pdfTeX, LuaTeX, XeTeX Leave a reply
  4. Growing up to be old Leave a reply
  5. Something about reverse inference Leave a reply
  6. Eye-Tracking with N > 1 Leave a reply
  7. Everything you believe in is wrong – or is it simply terrorism? Leave a reply
  8. Strava Leave a reply
  9. Everything is fucked … Leave a reply