Improving psychological science: further thoughts, reflections and ways forward

References

• Aczel, B., Szaszi, B., Sarafoglou, A., Kekecs, Z., Kucharský, Š., Benjamin, D., and Wagenmakers, E. J. (2020). A consensus-based transparency checklist. Nature Human Behaviour, 4(1), 4–8. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-019-0772-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, M.L., & Magruder, J. (2017). Split-sample strategies for avoiding false discoveries. NBER Working Papers 23544, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Baguley, T. (2004). Understanding statistical power in the context of applied research. Applied Ergonomics, 35(2), 73–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2004.01.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bauer, P. J. (2022). Psychological science stepping up a level. Psychological science, 33(2), 179–183. https://doi.org/10.1177/09567976221078527
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bosnjak, M., Fiebach, C., Mellor, D., Müller, S., O’Connor, D. B., Oswald, F. L., & Sokol, R. I. (2022). A template for preregistration of quantitative research in psychology: Report of the joint psychological societies preregistration task force. American Psychologist, 77(4), 602–615. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/amp0000879 In press
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brandt, M. J., IJzerman, H., Dijksterhuis, A., Farach, F. J., Geller, J., Giner-Sorolla, R., Grange, J. A., Perugini, M., Spies, J. R., & van ’t Veer, A. (2014). The replication recipe: What makes for a convincing replication? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 50(1), 217–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2013.10.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Button, K., Ioannidis, J., Mokrysz, C., Nosek, B. A., Flint, J., Robinson, E. S. J., & Munafò, M. R. (2013). Power failure: Why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 14(5), 365–376. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn3475
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chambers, C. D., & Tzavella, L. (2022). The past, present and future of registered reports. Nature Human Behaviour, 6(1), 29–42. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01193-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen, J. (1962). The statistical power of abnormal-social psychological research: A review. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 65(3), 145–153. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0045186
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dutilh, G., Annis, J., Brown, S. D., Cassey, P., Evans, N. J., Grasman, R. P. P. P., Hawkins, G. E., Heathcote, A., Holmes, W. R., Krypotos, A.-M., Kupitz, C. N., Leite, F. P., Lerche, V., Lin, Y.-S., Logan, G. D., Palmeri, T. J., Starns, J. J., Trueblood, J. S., van Maanen, L., … Donkin, C. (2019). The quality of response time data inference: A blinded, collaborative assessment of the validity of cognitive models. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 26(4), 1051–1069. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-017-1417-2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farrell, S., & Lewandowsky, S. (2010). Computational models as aids to better reasoning in psychology. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19(5), 329–335. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721410386677
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gelman, A., & Loken, E. (2013). The garden of forking paths: Why multiple comparisons can be a problem, even when there is no “fishing expedition” or “p-hacking” and the research hypothesis was posited ahead of time. http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~gelman/research/unpublished/p_hacking.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Giner-Sorolla, R., Carpenter, T., Lewis, N. A., Jr., Montoya, A. K., Aberson, C. L., Bostyn, D. H., Conrique, B. G., Ng, B. W., Reifman, A., Schoemann, A. M., & Soderberg, C. (2020). Power to detect what? Considerations for planning and evaluating sample size. Retrieved from https://osf.io/d3v8t
   Google Scholar
• Guest, O., & Martin, A. E. (2021). How computational modeling can force theory building in psychological science. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 16(4), 789–802. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691620970585
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kerr, N. L. (1998). HARKing: Hypothesizing after the results are known. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2(3), 196–217. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0203_4
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lakens, D., Adolfi, F. G., Albers, C. J., Anvari, F., Apps, M. A. J., Argamon, S. E., Baguley, T., Becker, R. B., Benning, S. D., Bradford, D. E., Buchanan, E. M., Caldwell, A. R., Van Calster, B., Carlsson, R., Chen, S.-C., Chung, B., Colling, L. J., Collins, G. S., Crook, Z., … Zwaan, R. A. (2018). Justify your alpha. Nature Human Behaviour, 2(3), 168–171. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-018-0311-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lakens, D. (2022). Sample size justification. Collabra: Psychology, 8(1), 33267. https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.33267
   Google Scholar
• Munafò, M. R., Nosek, B. A., Bishop, D. V., Button, K. S., Chambers, C. D., Du Sert, N. P., Simonsohn, U., Wagenmakers, E.-J., Ware, J. J., & Ioannidis, J. P. (2017). A manifesto for reproducible science. Nature Human Behaviour, 1(1), 0021. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-016-0021
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norris, E., & O’Connor, D. B. (2019). Science as behaviour: Using a behaviour change approach to increase uptake of open science. Psychology & Health, 34(12), 1397–1406. https://doi.org/10.1080/08870446.2019.1679373
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nosek, B. A., Alter, G., Banks, G. C., Borsboom, D., Bowman, S. D., Breckler, S. J., Buck, S., Chambers, C. D., Chin, G., Christensen, G., Contestabile, M., Dafoe, A., Eich, E., Freese, J., Glennerster, R., Goroff, D., Green, D. P., Hesse, B., Humphreys, M., … Yarkoni, T. (2015). Promoting an open research culture. Science, 348(6242), 1422–1425. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aab2374
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Connor, D. B. (2020). The future of health behaviour change interventions: Opportunities for open science and personality research. Health Psychology Review, 14(1), 176–181. https://doi.org/10.1080/17437199.2019.1707107
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Connor, D. B. (2021). Leonardo da Vinci, pre-registration and the architecture of science: Towards a more open and transparent research culture. Health Psychology Bulletin, 5(1), 39–45. https://doi.org/10.5334/hpb.20
   Google Scholar
• Oberauer, K., & Lewandowsky, S. (2019). Addressing the theory crisis in psychology. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 26(5), 1596–1618. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-019-01645-2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Open Science Collaboration. (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349(6251), aac4716. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aac4716
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rossetti, Y., Pisella, L., & McIntosh, R. D. (2017). Rise and fall of the two visual systems theory. Annals of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, 60(3), 130–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rehab.2017.02.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rossit, S., Harvey, M., Butler, S. H., Szymanek, L., Morand, S., Monaco, S., & McIntosh, R. D. (2018). Impaired peripheral reaching and on-line corrections in patient DF: Optic ataxia with visual form agnosia. Cortex, 98(1), 84–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2017.04.004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., & Simonsohn, U. (2011). False-positive psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant. Psychological Science, 22(11), 1359–1366. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611417632
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simonsohn, U., Simmons, J. P., & Nelson, L. D. (2020). Specification curve analysis. Nature Human Behaviour, 4, 1208–1214. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-020-0912-z
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• VanderWeele, T. J., Mathur, M. B., & Chen, Y. (2020). Outcome-Wide longitudinal designs for causal inference: A new template for empirical studies. Statistical Science, 35(3), 437–466. https://doi.org/10.1214/19-STS728
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar