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.
A widely publicized study, now discredited, shines light on the frequency of research fraud and the pitfalls that follow
Those fields would lose 16% after lawmakers protect other scientific disciplines within a nearly flat budget
Has it become harder for graduate students to thrive, and are our best potential scientists giving up on academia?
Has the traditional format of the science journal had its day? Dorothy Bishop outlines an alternative model, based on consensual communication
Although they speak proudly of our achievements, Conservative policies pose a substantial risk to science and innovation
Of course the EU frustratingly bureaucratic, but it pays for much of the UK’s science research and innovation
Half a century ago, the Loch Ness monster was something science was trying to get to the bottom of – as a running feud in the pages of New Scientist reveals
Policy-makers the world over urgently need to address the growing divide between haves and have-nots. Science has much to tell them – if only they would listen
These five most influential women are pioneers in the field of science and medicine
Ian Chubb releases report on economic benefit of science and maths and calls for issue such as genetically modified food to be discussed in a mature way