Open science practices in the false memory literature

Figures & data

Figure 1. PRISMA flowchart.

Note. As soon as the reviewer found one violation of an inclusion criterion, screening for other violations stopped.

Figure 2. Open science endorsement graph.

Note. The proportions per graph are presented. The preregistration variable includes registered reports. Open access publication concerns only gold open access status whereas open accessibility includes general accessibility of the report (including gold and green open access status). The latter, thus, is more highly endorsed compared to the former. Claimed practices are portrayed in grey and verified practices are presented in black.

Figure 3. Open science endorsement graph across the publication years (2015–2023).

Note. For clarity in our visual presentation, we included only the variables indicating claimed open science practices but not the verified implementation of these practices. The preregistration variable includes registered reports. Open access publication concerns only gold open access status whereas open accessibility includes general accessibility of the report (including gold and green open access status). The latter, thus, is more highly endorsed compared to the former.

Table 1. Frequentist and Bayesian logistic regression results predicting open science endorsement from year.

Variable	B (Intercept)	B (Year)	Z-value (Year)	OR (Year)	95% CI of OR (Year)	p-value (Year)	BF10 (Year)
Open access publication	−457.19	0.23	4.88	1.25	[1.15, 1.38]	<.001	158.86
Openly accessible report	−98.52	0.05	1.06	1.05	[0.96, 1.15]	0.289	0.36
Preregistration	−1094.80	0.54	4.88	1.72	[1.40, 2.17]	<.001	533015.77
Open access data	−1144.35	0.57	9.28	1.76	[1.57, 2.00]	<.001	1.10 × 10^+23
Open access materials	−224.93	0.11	2.66	1.12	[1.03, 1.21]	.008	0.32
Open access analysis	−691.58	0.34	4.00	1.41	[1.20, 1.68]	<.001	1238.79
Any open science	−534.75	0.27	4.01	1.30	[1.15, 1.49]	<.001	9.53
Any open science (conservative)	−773.14	0.38	7.16	1.47	[1.33, 1.64]	<.001	2.70 × 10^+8

Note. B = unstandardized regression coefficient; OR = Odds Ratio; CI = Confidence Interval; df = Degrees of Freedom; BF = Bayes factor. To control for multiple testing across our 14 comparisons for this research question, we applied a Bonferroni correction to the p-value, reducing the threshold to α = 0.0036.

Table 2. Frequentist and Bayesian logistic regression results predicting verified open science endorsement from year.

Variable	B (Intercept)	B (Year)	Z-value (Year)	OR (Year)	95% CI of OR (Year)	p-value (Year)	BF10 (Year)
Preregistration (verified)	−1052.49	0.52	4.65	1.68	[1.37, 2.13]	<.001	128269.24
Open access data (verified)	−810.62	0.40	6.96	1.49	[1.34, 1.68]	<.001	3.97 × 10^+10
Open access materials (verified)	−104.87	0.05	1.23	1.05	[0.97, 1.14]	.220	0.20
Open access analysis (verified)	−679.17	0.34	3.74	1.40	[1.18, 1.68]	<.001	282.53
Any open science (verified)	−429.57	0.21	3.52	1.24	[1.10, 1.40]	<.001	11.54
Any open science (conservative, verified)	−624.10	0.31	6.35	1.36	[1.24, 1.50]	<.001	565553.48

Note. B = unstandardized regression coefficient; OR = Odds Ratio; CI = Confidence Interval; df = Degrees of Freedom; BF = Bayes factor. To control for multiple testing across our 14 comparisons for this research question, we applied a Bonferroni correction to the p-value, reducing the threshold to α = 0.0036.

Table 3. Independent samples t-tests comparing citation count per year across various open science research practices.

Open science variable	Mean (No use)	Mean (Use)	t-value	df	p-value (one-sided)	BF10. (one-sided)	Cohen's d
Open access publication	2.54	2.37	0.60	386	.726	0.08	−0.06
Openly accessible report	1.89	2.69	−2.60	386	.005	6.24	0.30
Preregistration	2.47	2.56	−0.17	386	.431	0.23	0.03
Open access data	2.50	2.45	0.15	386	.560	0.10	−0.02
Open access materials	2.45	2.51	−0.23	386	.409	0.14	0.02
Open access analysis	2.46	2.65	−0.41	386	.342	0.26	0.07
Any open science	2.21	2.52	−0.76	386	.224	0.33	0.11
Any open science (conservative)	2.64	2.41	0.79	386	.784	0.07	−0.09

Note. df = Degrees of Freedom; BF = Bayes factor; Cohen’s d = Effect size. To control for multiple testing across our 14 comparisons for this research question, we applied a Bonferroni correction to the p-value, reducing the threshold to α = 0.0036.

Table 4. Independent samples t-tests comparing citation count per year across various verified open science research practices.

Open science variable	Mean (No use)	Mean (Use)	t-value	df	p-value (one-sided)	BF10. (one-sided)	Cohen's d
Preregistration (verified)	2.47	2.53	−0.10	386	.458	0.22	0.02
Open access data (verified)	2.40	2.69	−0.93	386	.177	0.31	0.11
Open access materials (verified)	2.39	2.62	−0.80	386	.213	0.25	0.08
Open access analysis (verified)	2.45	2.82	−0.75	386	.228	0.38	0.14
Any open science (verified)	2.06	2.55	−1.30	386	.098	0.61	0.18
Any open science (conservative, verified)	2.62	2.41	0.72	386	.764	0.07	−0.08

Note. df = Degrees of Freedom; BF = Bayes factor; Cohen’s d = Effect size. To control for multiple testing across our 14 comparisons for this research question, we applied a Bonferroni correction to the p-value, reducing the threshold to α = 0.0036.