Psychological science has come of age. But the rights of a mature discipline carry with them responsibilities, among them the responsibility to maximize confidence in our findings through good data practices and replication.
The November issue of Perspectives on Psychological Science, a journal of the Association for Psychological Science (APS), reflects the discipline's ongoing commitment to examine methodological issues that affect all areas of science — such as failures to replicate previous findings and problems of bias and error — with the goal of strengthening our discipline and contributing to the discussion that is taking place throughout science.
The issue features two special sections: one on replicability and one on research methods.
The special section on replicability brings together articles that examine the extent, causes, and solutions to some of the challenges faced by psychological science with regard to replication of research. The first nine articles in the section focus on diagnosing the problems within psychological science, while the next six articles discuss potential solutions. The aim of this special section is not to provide definitive answers, but to promote discussion and collective action to strengthen our science.
"We hope that the articles in this special section will not only be stimulating and pleasurable to read, but that they will also promote much wider discussion and, ultimately, collective actions that we can take to make our science more reliable and more reputable," write the section editors Harold Pashler of the University of California, San Diego and Eric-Jan Wagenmakers of the University of Amsterdam in The Netherlands.
The special section on research methods features articles that examine various aspects of research methodology, including the problem of false negatives and different approaches to detecting fraud. The section also includes a report on the goals, structure, and state of the Reproducibility Project from the Open Science Collaboration and a tongue-in-cheek take on questionable research practices in psychological science.
Because these topics are so important and so central to the scientific enterprise, APS is making the entire issue available to non-subscribers free for three months.
Association for Psychological Science: http://www.psychologicalscience.org
This press release was posted to serve as a topic for discussion. Please comment below. We try our best to only post press releases that are associated with peer reviewed scientific literature. Critical discussions of the research are appreciated. If you need help finding a link to the original article, please contact us on twitter or via e-mail.
With traditional funding stagnant and competition fierce, some scientists are using Internet sites such as Experiment to appeal to the public for money.UC San Diego graduate student Alex Piel is studying the family dynamics and habitats of chimpanzees in Tanzania's savanna. The research requires tracking animals, retrieving fecal samples and then testing to confirm genetic links.
Survey shows increased number of female students are interested in studying Stem subjects beyond A-Level
Days after a wide-ranging debate on creationism and evolution between Bill Nye and Ken Ham, the topic is driving an online conversation about points raised in the debate. Themes of belief and literalism, logic and faith — and, for some, relevance — are being debated online.
Tyrone Hayes, a biology professor at the University of California, Berkeley, has spent the past 15 years to studying the adverse effects of atrazine, a common herbicide used in the U.S. For much of that time, Hayes believed he was being watched and closely followed by Syngenta, the Swiss company that produces the chemical, in an effort to discredit his findings.
True sceptics test a hypothesis against the evidence, but climate sceptics refuse to accept anything that contradicts their beliefs
Research careers are built on publishing in high-profile journals, so can postdocs be expected to take a stand against them?
China is investing unprecedented amounts in research and development while changing the way science is practised
A bibliometric analysis in Nature purports to confirm that women scientists are discriminated against. But the full picture might be much more interesting
There are indeed concerns about the current science publishing model, but until major changes in grant funding are incorporated, researchers will continue to lust after publications in high-tier journals
A new survey of 20-year-old studies shows that poor archives and inaccessible authors make 90 percent of raw data impossible to find