Public case study

See what a Peer2Paper result looks like.

This sanitized public case study publishes Peer2Paper's aggregate findings and limitations. Underlying research materials and internal audit records are not redistributed.

Audit completedP2P-CS-0001
Verdict

Source verified; material sensitivity

Confidence: High

Among unvaccinated Republican or Republican-leaning participants, a Republican elite endorsement increases vaccination intentions relative to a Democratic elite endorsement.

MetricEstimateIntervalp
Reported0.028[0.006, 0.041]0.002
Audited path0.026631[0.008497, 0.044765]0.004053
Decision brief JSON Replay pack
View the full result
Principal findings

What the evidence supports

The primary source report is verified for its coefficient, interval, test statistic and p value, with explicit limits; this is not an independent statistical replication.

Statistical support changes across verified adjusted and unadjusted analysis paths, although both estimates remain positive.

The primary paper and supplemental documentation conflict about the population included in the analysis.

Why this wording matters

The canonical audit classified numerical reproduction as not assessable. The public verdict therefore distinguishes verified source reporting, bounded robustness sensitivity and unresolved source conflicts.

Primary paper · Author-deposited materials