.png){kind=icon}
Return
Questionable Research Practices
.png){kind=icon}
PRE
AI
DOI：10.1093/oso/9780190938550.003.0010.png)
.png){kind=icon}
Original request for help.png){kind=icon}
Share.png){kind=icon}
Save
Abstract
En 中文
Abstract
There is increasing concern that the veracity of research findings in a number of scientific disciplines, including psychology, may be compromised by questionable research/reporting practices (QRPs). QRPs, such as hypothesizing after results are known, selectively deleting outliers, and “p-hacking,” bolster findings by giving the appearance of statistical significance, generalizability, and novelty. In truth, studies containing such QRPs do not replicate, do not generalize, and mislead both research and practice. This process of “ugly” initial results metamorphosing into “beautiful” articles through QRPs is known as the chrysalis effect and has the potential to compromise the integrity of the field and the trust practitioners and external funding agencies place in psychology research. This chapter reviews the extant research of the existence and frequency of QRP engagement. We then transition into the antecedents and outcomes of QRPs, with a focus on the system processes that both encourage and facilitate QRP engagement. We then close with a series of steps that might mitigate QRP prevalence in order for research to reflect best scientific practices.
Journal
No journal information available
Organization
No organization information available
Cited Papers
No cited papers available