Results 51 to 60 of about 30,037 (154)
Psychology’s Replication Crisis and Clinical Psychological Science
Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 2018 Despite increasing interest in issues of replicability, open science, research transparency, and improving methods and practices in psychological science, the clinical psychology community has been slow to engage. This has been slowly shifting, and the authors of the present article hope to facilitate this emerging dialogue.
Jennifer L Tackett +3 more
openaire +3 more sources
Publication bias and the canonization of false facts
eLife, 2016 Science is facing a “replication crisis” in which many experimental findings cannot be replicated and are likely to be false. Does this imply that many scientific facts are false as well? To find out, we explore the process by which a claim becomes fact.
Silas Boye Nissen +3 more
doaj +1 more source
The Replication Database: Documenting the Replicability of Psychological Science
Journal of Open Psychology DataIn psychological science, replicability—repeating a study with a new sample achieving consistent results (Parsons et al., 2022)—is critical for affirming the validity of scientific findings.
Lukas Röseler +96 more
doaj +1 more source
Calenda, 2020 The results of good science are supposed to be true everywhere and at any time: replicability is traditionally considered a ground of the epistemic authority of modern science. However, in somecases (especially in biomedical, social and psychological studies), important published scientific findings have failed to replicate.
openaire +1 more source
‘What are psychology journals publishing about the world of work?’: A systematised review
SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 2020 Orientation: Work-related research from the perspective of psychology journal publications is reviewed, indicating research topic trends and research method use. Research purpose: What psychology journals are publishing about work-related topics as well
Salome E. Scholtz +2 more
doaj +1 more source
Publication bias is bad for science if not necessarily scientists
Royal Society Open ScienceIt might seem obvious that the scientific process should not be biased. We strive for reliable inference, and systematically skewing the results of inquiry apparently conflicts with this.
Remco Heesen, Liam Kofi Bright
doaj +1 more source
Revisiting the Replication Crisis and the Untrustworthiness of Empirical Evidence
StatsThe current replication crisis relating to the non-replicability and the untrustworthiness of published empirical evidence is often viewed through the lens of the Positive Predictive Value (PPV) in the context of the Medical Diagnostic Screening (MDS ...
Aris Spanos
doaj +1 more source
What is the Replication Crisis a Crisis Of?
Philosophy of ScienceAbstractIn recent debates about the replication crisis, two positions have been dominant: one that focuses on methodological reforms and one that focuses on theory building. This paper takes up the suggestion that there might be a deeper difference in play, concerning the ways the very subject matter of psychology is construed by opposing camps, i.e ...
openaire +1 more source
Psychologica Belgica, 2019 A crescendo of incidents have raised concerns about whether scientific practices in psychology may be suboptimal, sometimes leading to the publication, dissemination, and application of unreliable or misinterpreted findings.
Lee Jussim +3 more
doaj +1 more source