{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.027675276752767528, 'fraction_numerical': 0.02214022140221402, 'mean_word_length': 5.170454545454546, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A question of reliability or of boundary conditions? Comment on Gomes and McCullough (2015).

Gomes and McCullough (2015) are to be commended on their high-powered attempt to replicate our earlier research (Shariff & Norenzayan, 2007). We suggest that notable differences between the two studies indicate that Gomes and McCullough were testing a different question. Here we place Gomes and McCullough's results in context with other studies and discuss how their findings may point to an interesting boundary condition of the original effect.