![]() As editor of Clinical Psychological Science, Scott Lilienfeld also adopted badges and reporting standards that incentivize best practices. Steve Lindsay also adopted a variant of the Pottery Barn rule (Srivastava, 2012) by creating an article format for replications of studies published in Psychological Science (Lindsay, 2017). His successor, Steve Lindsay, has continued that tradition by adding consulting statisticians to the journal editing team, asking authors to make their data and materials accessible to the editors and reviewers, and requesting that authors report on their use (or nonuse) of open science practices. At Psychological Science, Eric Eich implemented changes to reporting practices to allow more comprehensive method and results sections and more transparent and complete reporting, and he incentivized transparency by awarding badges for open data, open materials, and preregistration. Perspectives also launched Registered Replication Reports as a new way to evaluate the strength of evidence for important effects (Simons, Holcombe, & Spellman, 2014 AMPPS will be their new home). With Bobbie Spellman as Editor, Perspectives on Psychological Science published a series of groundbreaking articles on research practices, and as Associate Editor, Alison Ledgerwood organized several special sections on research methods and metascience. In many ways, APS has been a leader in supporting improved research and reporting practices. Novel article formats such as Registered Reports - in which reviewers evaluate a study’s rigor and design before data collection (Chambers, 2013 see here for more information) - were not yet among our publishing options. Few journals, funders, or societies had established guidelines for data sharing. The Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) guidelines for publishing, spearheaded by the Center for Open Science and now adopted by more than 5,000 journals and organizations ( including APS), had not yet been conceived. Facebook groups were not actively discussing research methods and practices. Badges and incentives for open practices were nonexistent. ![]() 1 Preregistration was rare outside of clinical trials stand-alone direct replications were barely publishable and multilab collaborations were uncommon. Less than 10 years ago, nobody had heard the terms “ p-hacking” or “researcher degrees of freedom” (Simmons, Nelson, & Simonsohn, 2011) and few knew the problems with “HARKing” (Kerr, 1998). The primary mission of Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science ( AMPPS) is to foster such discussions of and advances in practices, research design, statistical methods. Discussions of research practices have gone mainstream, and changes to research and publishing practices are happening faster now than at any point in our field’s recent history. The past 7 years has seen a dramatic and field-wide transformation, with more and more people interested in evaluating and improving their own research practices and those of the field as a whole. Although these problems linger, I am more optimistic about the state of our field now than at any earlier point in my career.These are exciting times for psychological science. Below is a reprint of that editorial, which also appears online.įor decades, experts like Cohen, Meehl, de Groot, Cronbach, Loevinger, and many others repeatedly raised concerns about small-sample studies, questionable research practices, poor design, noisy measures, violated statistical assumptions, flawed inferences, a lack of direct replication, and publication bias (Cohen, 1962 Cronbach & Meehl, 1955 de Groot, 1956/2014 Loevinger, 1957 Meehl, 1967). Simons, University of Illinois, discusses the journal’s mission, its structure, and its leading role in advancing APS’s overall leadership in fostering scientific transparency, openness, and reproducibility. In his editorial for the opening issue, AMPPS Editor Daniel J. The journal’s editorial scope encompasses the breadth of psychological science, with editors, reviewers, and articles representing a balance among diverse disciplinary perspectives and methodological approaches. ![]() This one-of-a-kind journal publishes new types of empirical work and articles and tutorials that reflect the various approaches to research across the field. The first issue of APS ’s newest journal Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science (AMPPS ) debuts this month. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |