REPORT — pinillossimpsonndexperimentalevidencesupporting

What I processed

• Target PDF: inbox/Pinillos&Simpson2014..pdf
• Paper key: pinillossimpsonndexperimentalevidencesupporting

Pipeline outputs used (in priority order)

• papers/pinillossimpsonndexperimentalevidencesupporting/out/bundle.json (status/index)
• papers/pinillossimpsonndexperimentalevidencesupporting/out/fulltext.md and papers/pinillossimpsonndexperimentalevidencesupporting/out/text.txt (context + most stats)
• papers/pinillossimpsonndexperimentalevidencesupporting/out/tei.xml (recovery of truncated Figure 1.1 condition stats)

Manual interventions / issues

Used the raw PDF for page numbers and to recover truncated numeric stats

• out/fulltext.md/out/text.txt truncate some Experiment 2 (Airplane) condition statistics mid-sentence.
• I used pdfgrep -n and pdftotext -f/-l on papers/pinillossimpsonndexperimentalevidencesupporting/pdf/paper.pdf to:
• recover the full condition means/SDs/Ns for Experiment 2 (PDF page 13), and
• attach PDF page numbers to analysis-critical provenance quotes.

Effect size computations (Quarto; reproducible)

• Computed all effect_size.d and effect_size.v from group means/SDs/Ns (between-groups SMD) in:
• papers/pinillossimpsonndexperimentalevidencesupporting/analysis/effect_sizes.qmd
• rendered to papers/pinillossimpsonndexperimentalevidencesupporting/analysis/effect_sizes.html

Uncertainties / questions for human review (fill these in)

Q1 — Full bibliographic citation (year/editors/pages/DOI)

• The PDF text includes the chapter title and authors, and page headers suggest the volume title “Advances in Experimental Epistemology”, but I did not find:
• publication year for this chapter,
• editors/publisher details,
• chapter page range in the volume, or
• a DOI.
• I set paper.year: null, paper.published: null, and used “(n.d.)” in paper.citation.
• Please provide the complete reference (and confirm whether it should be coded as published/peer-reviewed).

RESOLVED — Study 2 (Air/Bridge) vignette wording

• The appendix was located in out/external/pinillos IRI paper with shawn october 2014.pdf.
• It contains the Air appendix material and the full Bridge low/high vignettes plus the level-of-agreement prompts.
• Study 2 Air and Bridge effects have therefore been changed to needs_review: false; the numerical effect sizes were unchanged.

RESOLVED BY CODING DECISION — Modal-reading Typo experiment

• Study 6 reports condition Ns and descriptive statistics for the Typo “Knows vs Hopes” modal-reading test, but does not explicitly report participant recruitment or compensation.
• Coding decision: recruitment/compensation were coded as mTurk/money by continuity with the surrounding Pinillos & Simpson 2014 studies in the same paper. The compensation amount remains unreported.
• The located Pinillos & Simpson appendix does not contain the full Typo vignette wording. Study 6 says it used the low-stakes and high-stakes Typo vignettes, so the full vignette wording was copied from the local Pinillos 2012 extraction (papers/pinillos2012knowledgeexperimentspracitcal).
• The stale needs_review flag for Study 6 was cleared in the source YAML. No final-analysis CSV update was made here.

Notes

• I extracted stakes effects from:
• Study 1 Experiment 1 (Water purifier),
• Study 1 Experiment 2 (Airplane; split by probability for matched low/high stakes contrasts),
• Study 2 probes (Coin/Air/Bridge; one study entry per probe due to different scales and separate Ns),
• and the Typo modal-reading test (stakes effect on the Knows evidence-seeking question).
• I did not extract Study 3 (RKP/ACTION) because it does not add a new high-vs-low stakes contrast effect in the stakes-meta schema format (it analyzes normative questions/correlations rather than a direct stakes manipulation effect per scenario).