Narcissism, Entitlement, and Questionable Research Practices in Counseling: A Pilot Study

2008 ◽  
Vol 86 (2) ◽  
pp. 200-210 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark S. Davis ◽  
Kelly L. Wester ◽  
Bridgett King
Keyword(s):  
Pilot Study ◽  
Research Practices ◽  
Questionable Research Practices

scholarly journals The effect of preregistration on trust in empirical research findings: results of a registered report

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 181351 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarahanne M. Field ◽  
E.-J. Wagenmakers ◽  
Henk A. L. Kiers ◽  
Rink Hoekstra ◽  
Anja F. Ernst ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pilot Study ◽  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
Empirical Research ◽  
Strong Evidence ◽  
Bayes Factors ◽  
Research Practices ◽  
Questionable Research Practices ◽  
Research Findings ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Research Initiatives

The crisis of confidence has undermined the trust that researchers place in the findings of their peers. In order to increase trust in research, initiatives such as preregistration have been suggested, which aim to prevent various questionable research practices. As it stands, however, no empirical evidence exists that preregistration does increase perceptions of trust. The picture may be complicated by a researcher's familiarity with the author of the study, regardless of the preregistration status of the research. This registered report presents an empirical assessment of the extent to which preregistration increases the trust of 209 active academics in the reported outcomes, and how familiarity with another researcher influences that trust. Contrary to our expectations, we report ambiguous Bayes factors and conclude that we do not have strong evidence towards answering our research questions. Our findings are presented along with evidence that our manipulations were ineffective for many participants, leading to the exclusion of 68% of complete datasets, and an underpowered design as a consequence. We discuss other limitations and confounds which may explain why the findings of the study deviate from a previously conducted pilot study. We reflect on the benefits of using the registered report submission format in light of our results. The OSF page for this registered report and its pilot can be found here: http://dx.doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/B3K75 .

Towards guaranteed data-integrity: A method of preventing Questionable Research Practices

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dick Bierman ◽  
Jacob Jolij
Keyword(s):  
Real Time ◽  
Open Data ◽  
Data Integrity ◽  
Drop Out ◽  
Research Practices ◽  
Major Aspect ◽  
Questionable Research Practices ◽  
Blockchain Technology ◽  
Integrity System ◽  
Secure Server

We have tested the feasibility of a method to prevent the occurrence of so-called Questionable Research Practices (QRP). A part from embedded pre-registration the major aspect of the system is real-time uploading of data on a secure server. We outline the method, discuss the drop-out treatment and compare it to the Born-open data method, and report on our preliminary experiences. We also discuss the extension of the data-integrity system from secure server to use of blockchain technology.

Dealing with imperfect elicitation results

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rens van de Schoot ◽  
Elian Griffioen ◽  
Sonja Désirée Winter
Keyword(s):  
Statistical Parameter ◽  
Research Practices ◽  
Popular Method ◽  
Questionable Research Practices ◽  
Present Information

The trial-and-roulette method is a popular method to extract experts’ beliefs about a statistical parameter. However, most studies examining the validity of this method only use ‘perfect’ elicitation results. In practice, it is sometimes hard to obtain such neat elicitation results. In our project about predicting fraud and questionable research practices among PhD candidates, we ran into issues with imperfect elicitation results. The goal of the current chapter is to provide an over-view of the solutions we used for dealing with these imperfect results, so that others can benefit from our experience. We present information about the nature of our project, the reasons for the imperfect results, and how we resolved these sup-ported by annotated R-syntax.

scholarly journals Dark Pathways to Achievement in Science: Researchers’ Achievement Goals Predict Engagement in Questionable Research Practices

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 783-791 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan Janke ◽  
Martin Daumiller ◽  
Selma Carolin Rudert
Keyword(s):  
Achievement Goals ◽  
Multiple Regression Model ◽  
Learning Approach ◽  
Research Practices ◽  
Scientific Rigor ◽  
Questionable Research Practices ◽  
Personal Motivation ◽  
Approach Goals ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Negative Predictor

Questionable research practices (QRPs) are a strongly debated topic in the scientific community. Hypotheses about the relationship between individual differences and QRPs are plentiful but have rarely been empirically tested. Here, we investigate whether researchers’ personal motivation (expressed by achievement goals) is associated with self-reported engagement in QRPs within a sample of 217 psychology researchers. Appearance approach goals (striving for skill demonstration) positively predicted engagement in QRPs, while learning approach goals (striving for skill development) were a negative predictor. These effects remained stable when also considering Machiavellianism, narcissism, and psychopathy in a latent multiple regression model. Additional moderation analyses revealed that the more researchers favored publishing over scientific rigor, the stronger the association between appearance approach goals and engagement in QRPs. The findings deliver first insights into the nature of the relationship between personal motivation and scientific malpractice.

scholarly journals Excess success in “Don’t count calorie labeling out: Calorie counts on the left side of menu items lead to lower calorie food choices”

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory Francis ◽  
Evelina Thunell
Keyword(s):  
Success Rate ◽  
Publication Bias ◽  
Food Choices ◽  
Effect Sizes ◽  
Sample Sizes ◽  
Research Practices ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Questionable Research Practices ◽  
Calorie Labeling

Based on findings from six experiments, Dallas, Liu & Ubel (2019) concluded that placing calorie labels to the left of menu items influences consumers to choose lower calorie food options. Contrary to previously reported findings, they suggested that calorie labels do influence food choices, but only when placed to the left because they are in this case read first. If true, these findings have important implications for the design of menus and may help address the obesity pandemic. However, an analysis of the reported results indicates that they seem too good to be true. We show that if the effect sizes in Dallas et al. (2019) are representative of the populations, a replication of the six studies (with the same sample sizes) has a probability of only 0.014 of producing uniformly significant outcomes. Such a low success rate suggests that the original findings might be the result of questionable research practices or publication bias. We therefore caution readers and policy makers to be skeptical about the results and conclusions reported by Dallas et al. (2019).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document