In this upcoming editorial period, we aim to clarify our policy regarding replication studies, a topic that has become the object of intense academic debate in empirical psychology today and a type of publication that we want to encourage in Trends in Psychology. Recent discussions on the replication crisis in psychology have primarily focused on selective methodological enhancements, often neglecting the importance of sample diversity (Open Science Collaboration, 2015). This bias is evident in the differential treatment of research based on the country of origin of the sample. For instance, studies featuring samples form certain countries may face stricter methodological demands during peer review and publication. Notably, it has been pointed out that mentioning the country of origin of the sample in the title of the article can lead to bias in research evaluation (Kahalon et al., 2022). This suggests that the purported rigor associated with replication efforts could be influenced by factors beyond methodological soundness, raising questions about the objectivity of the evaluation process.
The Future of Replication Studies at Trends in Psychology
Marsico, Giuseppina
2024-01-01
Abstract
In this upcoming editorial period, we aim to clarify our policy regarding replication studies, a topic that has become the object of intense academic debate in empirical psychology today and a type of publication that we want to encourage in Trends in Psychology. Recent discussions on the replication crisis in psychology have primarily focused on selective methodological enhancements, often neglecting the importance of sample diversity (Open Science Collaboration, 2015). This bias is evident in the differential treatment of research based on the country of origin of the sample. For instance, studies featuring samples form certain countries may face stricter methodological demands during peer review and publication. Notably, it has been pointed out that mentioning the country of origin of the sample in the title of the article can lead to bias in research evaluation (Kahalon et al., 2022). This suggests that the purported rigor associated with replication efforts could be influenced by factors beyond methodological soundness, raising questions about the objectivity of the evaluation process.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.