...
首页> 外文期刊>Research policy >Using retracted journal articles in psychology to understand research misconduct in the social sciences: What is to be done?
【24h】

Using retracted journal articles in psychology to understand research misconduct in the social sciences: What is to be done?

机译:使用心理学上撤回的期刊文章来理解社会科学领域的研究不端行为:该怎么办?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

This paper explores the nature and impact of research misconduct in psychology by analyzing 160 articles that were retracted from prominent scholarly journals between 1998 and 2017. We compare findings with recent studies of retracted papers in economics, and business and management, to profile practices that are likely to be problematic in cognate social science disciplines. In psychology, the principal reason for retraction was data fabrication. Retractions took longer to make, and generally were from higher ranked and more prestigious journals, than in the two cognate disciplines. We recommend that journal editors should be more forthcoming in the reasons they provide for article retractions. We also recommend that the discipline of psychology gives a greater priority to the publication of replication studies; initiates a debate about how to respond to failed replications; adopts a more critical attitude to the importance of attaining statistical significance; discourages p-hacking and Hypothesizing After Results are Known (HARKing); assesses the long-term effects of pre-registering research; and supports stronger procedures to attest to the authenticity of data in research papers. Our contribution locates these issues in the context of a growing crisis of confidence in the value of social science research. We also challenge individual researchers to reassert the primacy of disinterested academic inquiry above pressures that can lead to an erosion of scholarly integrity.
机译:本文通过分析1998年至2017年间从著名学术期刊撤回的160篇文章,探讨了心理学研究不端行为的性质和影响。我们将经济学与商业,管理学方面的撤回论文的最新研究结果与最新研究结果进行了比较,以剖析实践在相关的社会科学学科中可能会出现问题。在心理学上,收回的主要原因是数据制造。与两个同类学科相比,撤稿花费的时间更长,并且通常来自排名较高且享有盛誉的期刊。我们建议期刊编辑应提供更多文章撤回的理由。我们还建议心理学学科应优先考虑复制研究的出版。发起有关如何应对失败的复制的辩论;对获得统计意义的重要性采取更为批判的态度;不鼓励在知道结果后进行p-hacking和假设(HARKing);评估预注册研究的长期影响;并支持更强大的程序来证明研究论文中数据的真实性。在对社会科学研究价值的信任危机日益严重的背景下,我们的贡献致力于解决这些问题。我们还挑战个别研究人员,在可能导致学术诚信受损的压力之上,重申无私学术研究的首要地位。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Research policy》 |2020年第4期|103930.1-103930.9|共9页
  • 作者单位

    Durham University Durham University Business School Mill Hill Lane Durham DH1 3LB;

    University of Portsmouth Portsmouth Business School Portland Street Portsmouth P01 3DE UK;

    University of Sussex Falmer Brigton BN1 9RH UK;

    University of Essex Colchester CO4 3SQ UK;

  • 收录信息 美国《科学引文索引》(SCI);美国《工程索引》(EI);
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

    Misconduct; Psychology; Research; Replication; Retractions;

    机译:不当行为;心理学;研究;复制;缩回;

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号