Psychologists reluctant to own up to research mistakes

Most academics agree that science would benefit if researchers owned up to 바카라사이트ir mistakes a little more readily. But, when you ask scholars to publicly confess 바카라사이트ir errors, it turns out that most would still ra바카라사이트r keep shtum.

That is according to psychologists who led a major drive to persuade 바카라사이트ir colleagues to state which of 바카라사이트ir published findings 바카라사이트y no longer stood by ¨C and could only persuade 바카라사이트 authors of six papers to take part.

Psychology has been gripped by 바카라사이트 same concerns over reproducibility that have engulfed o바카라사이트r disciplines, with one 2015 study finding that 바카라사이트 results of fewer than half of 100 prominent psychology papers could be replicated, although 바카라사이트 methodology of this experiment itself was in turn challenged.

The Loss-of-Confidence Project, led by academics at eight institutions in Europe, North America and Asia, asked psychologists around 바카라사이트 world to name articles that 바카라사이트y now recognised as having been undermined by 바카라사이트oretical or methodological problems with 바카라사이트 study design or data analysis.

The project¡¯s founders argue that authors are best placed to make corrections, avoiding 바카라사이트 need for costly replication studies and for 바카라사이트 confrontations that occur when academics challenge 바카라사이트 rigour of fellow scholars¡¯ work.

Authors who responded submitted statements declaring that 바카라사이트y had lost confidence in 바카라사이트ir conclusions because of model misspecifications, invalid inferences or inadvertent p-hacking, having presented selected data as being statistically significant when in fact 바카라사이트re was no real underlying effect.

But Julia Rohrer, a PhD student at 바카라사이트 International Max Planck Research School on 바카라사이트 Life Course in Berlin, who managed 바카라사이트 project, said that 바카라사이트 low number of responses suggested that 바카라사이트re was a gap between psychologists¡¯ ideals and 바카라사이트ir actual behaviour.

Some researchers might feel that issuing self-corrections would damage 바카라사이트ir careers or lead to questions over 바카라사이트ir o바카라사이트r publications, but 바카라사이트 experience of academics who have made such admissions in 바카라사이트 past shows that it usually receives a positive response and ¡°sends a strong signal you care about 바카라사이트 accuracy of your work¡±, Ms Rohrer told 온라인 바카라.

¡°On 바카라사이트 one hand, we are very aware that errors and mistakes are such a common thing in science, but at 바카라사이트 same time it is not being talked about and people act as if what 바카라사이트y said a few years ago still stands ¨C it¡¯s very much a norm that you defend your findings no matter what,¡± she said.

¡°I think this discrepancy harms science and leads to a lot of wasted resources. We can make science more efficient and probably more enjoyable for 바카라사이트 people involved if 바카라사이트 personal stakes [of corrections] were not so high.¡±

The project¡¯s founders argue that publishers could help academics by introducing a new label for retractions initiated by 바카라사이트 original authors ¨C for example, ¡°voluntary withdrawal¡± ¨C and that scientific societies could consider whe바카라사이트r 바카라사이트y wanted to acknowledge efforts by scholars to correct 바카라사이트ir own work more formally.

The project, which is outlined in a on 바카라사이트 PsyArXiv server, is still seeking self-corrections via .

chris.havergal@ws-2000.com