Registered Reports and Replications in Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics
- … show all 0 hide
Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics is launching a new type of research report: Registered Reports and Replications (RRR). Here is why we are trying this experiment. APP is always interested in strengthening the reliability and validity of the results in our science. However, there has been a recent rise in concern about several pitfalls on that road. These include the following:
Publication bias: Studies that yield statistically “significant” results get published, while those that don’t stay in the file drawer. The file drawer problem makes it difficult to evaluate how replicable a finding might be. If 20 people independently run the same study, 1 will get published; in the most dire case, 1 person might run 20 experiments and publish the one that beats p < .05. This can lead to a proliferation of nonreplicable effects in the literature.
P-hacking (Simmons, Nelson, & Simonsohn, 2011): This covers a range of dangerous practices designed to get the p-value under the magic p < .05 ...
- Button, KS, Ioannidis, JPA, Mokrysz, C, Nosek, BA, Flint, J, Robinson, ESJ, Munafò, MR (2013) Power failure: Why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 14: pp. 365-376 CrossRef
- Chambers, C. D. (2013). Registered reports: a new publishing initiative at Cortex. Cortex, 49, 609–610. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23347556
- Fanelli, D (2010) “Positive” results increase down the hierarchy of the sciences. PLoS One 5: pp. e10068 CrossRef
- Francis, G (2012) Publication bias and the failure of replication in experimental psychology. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 19: pp. 975-991 CrossRef
- Fuchs, HM, Jenny, M, Fielder, S (2012) Psychologists are open to change, yet wary of rules. Perspectives on Psychological Science 7: pp. 639-642 CrossRef
- Nosek, BA, Spies, JR, Motyl, M (2012) Scientific utopia II: Restructuring incentives and practices to promote truth over publishability. Perspectives on Psychological Science 7: pp. 615-631 CrossRef
- Roediger, H. L., III (2012). Psychology’s woes and a partial cure: The value of replication. APS Observer, 25(2), 9, 27–29.
- Rosenthal, R (1979) The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin 86: pp. 638-641 CrossRef
- Simmons, JP, Nelson, LD, Simonsohn, U (2011) False positive psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant. Psychological Science 22: pp. 1359-1366 CrossRef
- Tressoldi, PE (2012) Replication unreliability in psychology: Elusive phenomena or “elusive” statistical power?. Frontiers in Psychology 3: pp. 218 CrossRef
- Wagenmakers, E-J, Wetzels, R, Borsboom, D, Mass, HJL, Klievit, RA (2012) An agenda for purely confirmatory research. Perspectives on Psychological Science 7: pp. 632-638 CrossRef
- Registered Reports and Replications in Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics
Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics
Volume 75, Issue 5 , pp 781-783
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Additional Links
- Industry Sectors