"Despite the importance of direct replications, conceptual replications of priming are much more important as they test the applicability of priming in practice."

Priming studies are about to show a specific priming effect. With this effect, a practical application can be implemented. To test for the reliability of the specific experiment method, a direct replication is better. But to get a clear view of the priming effect as it can be practically used, conceptual replications are more important. These don’t test the reliability of the method, but the applicability of the underlying, more fundamental, priming effect.

If we look at an experiment where people were more helpful after finding money in a telephone cell, it would be concluded that only money influences helping behavior positively (Isen & Levin, 1972). Due to conceptual replications however, it was found out helping behavior is also more observed after other stimuli (e.g. receiving cookies), resulting in a more general finding, that a good mood is triggering helping behavior. So, conceptual replications give a more representative view of the researched effect.

 If the study was only directly replicated, we would think that not a good mood in general, but only finding money triggers helping behavior. This way only one option for the desired effect is known, and this is limiting the practical applicability. Now somebody could only think of giving money away to improve helping behavior, but after doing conceptual replications the same person could improve the same behavior by letting people think of good memories (Isen & Levin, 1972). So for the applicability of the effect, conceptual replications are more important.