The reproducibility crisis in psychology: Attack of the clones or phantom menace?

2017 ◽  
pp. 273-287 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey K. Smith ◽  
Lisa F. Smith ◽  
Benjamin K. Smith
Keyword(s):  
Crisis In Psychology

scholarly journals Fragmentation or Differentiation: Questioning the Crisis in Psychology

2008 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 104-115 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tania Zittoun ◽  
Alex Gillespie ◽  
Flora Cornish
Keyword(s):  
Crisis In Psychology

Psychology Exceptionalism and the Multiple Discovery of the Replication Crisis

2021 ◽  
pp. 108926802110465
Author(s):  
Nicole C. Nelson ◽  
Julie Chung ◽  
Kelsey Ichikawa ◽  
Momin M. Malik
Keyword(s):  
Subject Matter ◽  
Common Core ◽  
Early Years ◽  
Institutional Factors ◽  
Scientific Practices ◽  
Incentive Structure ◽  
Biomedical Sciences ◽  
Current Crisis ◽  
Replication Crisis ◽  
Crisis In Psychology

This article outlines what we call the “narrative of psychology exceptionalism” in commentaries on the replication crisis: many thoughtful commentaries link the current crisis to the specificity of psychology’s history, methods, and subject matter, but explorations of the similarities between psychology and other fields are comparatively thin. Historical analyses of the replication crisis in psychology further contribute to this exceptionalism by creating a genealogy of events and personalities that shares little in common with other fields. We aim to rebalance this narrative by examining the emergence and evolution of replication discussions in psychology alongside their emergence and evolution in biomedicine. Through a mixed-methods analysis of commentaries on replication in psychology and the biomedical sciences, we find that these conversations have, from the early years of the crisis, shared a common core that centers on concerns about the effectiveness of traditional peer review, the need for greater transparency in methods and data, and the perverse incentive structure of academia. Drawing on Robert Merton’s framework for analyzing multiple discovery in science, we argue that the nearly simultaneous emergence of this narrative across fields suggests that there are shared historical, cultural, or institutional factors driving disillusionment with established scientific practices.

scholarly journals Registered reports: an early example and analysis

PeerJ ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. e6232 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Wiseman ◽  
Caroline Watt ◽  
Diana Kornbrot
Keyword(s):  
Data Collection ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Circumstantial Evidence ◽  
Focused Attention ◽  
Behavioral Sciences ◽  
Positive Role ◽  
Questionable Research Practices ◽  
Methodological Rigor ◽  
Replication Crisis ◽  
Crisis In Psychology

The recent ‘replication crisis’ in psychology has focused attention on ways of increasing methodological rigor within the behavioral sciences. Part of this work has involved promoting ‘Registered Reports’, wherein journals peer review papers prior to data collection and publication. Although this approach is usually seen as a relatively recent development, we note that a prototype of this publishing model was initiated in the mid-1970s by parapsychologist Martin Johnson in the European Journal of Parapsychology (EJP). A retrospective and observational comparison of Registered and non-Registered Reports published in the EJP during a seventeen-year period provides circumstantial evidence to suggest that the approach helped to reduce questionable research practices. This paper aims both to bring Johnson’s pioneering work to a wider audience, and to investigate the positive role that Registered Reports may play in helping to promote higher methodological and statistical standards.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document