#' @title Glucose Model of Ego Depletion
#' @subtitle by M. Vadillo et al.
#' @details Vadillo, M. A., Hardwicke, T. E., & Shanks, D. R. (2016). Selection bias, vote counting, and money-priming effects: A comment on Rohrer, Pashler, and Harris (2015) and Vohs (2015). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 145(5), 655â€“663. http://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000157. <b>Note</b>: The results slightly differ from the paper, as these analyses are based on the p-curve disclosure table, which contains a slightly different ES selection than the meta-analyses reported in the paper.
#' @url https://osf.io/4e3gy

# For disclosure table about in/exclusion of effect sizes, see the link. 
# Thanks to @mavadillo for sharing open data!

# Vohs et al. + Caruso et al.
t(28) = 2.12
t(166) = 2.81
t(78) = 2.24
F(1, 271) = 14.63
F(1, 88) = 6.93
F(2,49) = 3.73
t(35) = 2.03
t(37) = 2.06
t(42) = 2.13
F(2, 32) = 4.34
t(38) = 2.13
t(33) = 2.37
F(2, 58) = 4.04
Chi2(2) = 10.10

# robustness
F(1, 271) = 10.22
t(33) = 2.30


# Table 1 in Vohs et al.

F (1,76) = 4.81
F(1,49)=4.18
F(1, 37)=6.63
t(66) = 3.15
t(88) = 2.99
F(2, 308) = 4.08
F(2, 84) = 10.02
F(1, 86) = 4.86
F(1, 80)=4.39
F(1, 92)=5.49


# replication studies: Rohrer et al. + ManyLabs 1

t(82) = -0.03
t(118) = 0.96
t(82) = -0.67
t(93) = 1.12
t(94) = 0.06
t(100) = -1.19
t(88) = 0.04
t(172) = 0.77
t(111) = 0.67
t(110) = -0.74
t(275) = -1.35
t(143) = -0.41
t(92) = 2
t(83) = 0.9
t(997) = -1.02
t(105) = 0.49
t(120) = 0.2
t(1324) = -0.51
t(93) = 0.07
t(100) = 0.15
t(83) = 0.61
t(160) = -1.37
t(77) = 0.92
t(167) = -0.77
t(185) = -1.09
t(85) = -1.22
t(223) = 1.33
t(78) = 0.94
t(125) = -0.84
t(140) = -0.17
t(79) = 1.33
t(105) = -0.29
t(94) = -1
t(101) = 0.87
t(88) = 1.14
t(85) = -0.88
t(134) = -0.43
t(418) = 0.58
t(210) = 0.0
t(189) = 1.70
t(154) = -0.36
t(114) = 0.76
