Using the Comparative Method in Democratic Theory: A Solution to the “File Drawer Problem”?

There are currently dozens of conceptions in democratic theory of what constitutes democratic progress and even more concepts of the crisis of democracy. This plethora of ideas is both good news and bad news. The boom in theorizing means that specializations have allowed political scientists to fine-tune their in-depth analysis in order to capture smaller and more specific movements of democratic progress and regress. But the multiplicity of models of the crisis and transformation of democracy also spells some bad news, which is far less often acknowledged and far less understood. This article seeks to shed light on the dangers of not comparing and integrating various models of democracy and to extrapolate the benefits of using the comparative method to do so.

Crowdsourced meta-analysis in psychological science: An open science approach to compiling and synthesizing scientific knowledge

This article introduces the concept of an open science meta-analysis that functions through crowdsourced imputation of data and is thereby perpetually updating. This is proposed to supplement the current journal article-based system of knowledge storage and synthesis and will, a) increase the consumptive capabilities of researchers (i.e., the amount of research one is exposed to), b) minimize cognitive biases that influence scientific knowledge, c) reduce the file-drawer problem, and d) create new knowledge through mass synthesis of existing research. The proposed infrastructure, much like the recent norm of publicly available data, may be viewed as an industry standard in the near future.

Powerless Conservatives or Powerless Findings?

ABSTRACTNoting the lack of “anti-man” bias research in the 2016 election, Zigerell (2019) argued that a relative lack of conservatives in political science can lead to bias in publications against political science research supporting conservative viewpoints. This article offers an alternative explanation for this lack of research: that this research produces null findings and therefore is subject to the “file-drawer problem,” in which null effects are less likely to be published than positive effects. Using data from the 2016 American National Election Studies, I provide an illustrative example to support this claim and suggest some solutions.

Disgust and political attitudes

We introduce the Politics and the Life Sciences Special Issue on Disgust and Political Attitudes discussing the importance of understanding state and trait disgust, the innovative and transparent process by which registered reports and preregistered studies were chosen and funded, and the manuscripts that make up this special issue. This essay concludes by discussing future research directions in disgust and political attitudes, as well as the benefits of a transparent review process that avoids the “file drawer problem” of unpublished null findings.

The perceived role of null results in school psychology research and publication

Researchers appear to assume that published research is limited to significant findings. If that is the case, it may be related to perceived or actual publication bias (i.e., journals publishing only significant findings) and/or the file-drawer problem (i.e., researchers not pursuing publication of null results). The lack of published null results can result in faulty decision-making based upon incomplete evidence. Thus, it is important to know the prevalence of, and the contributing factors to, researchers' failure to submit null results. Few studies have addressed this issue in psychology and none have targeted school psychology. Consequently, this study examined the file drawer problem and perception of publication bias among school psychologists. Survey data from 95 school psychology faculty indicated that participants published about half of the studies that they had conducted, suggesting that the file drawer problem is experienced by this population. While lack of time appeared to impact publication pursuit, participants' responses also suggested they believed in publication bias. Obtaining null results substantially impacted the decision to write up studies in pursuit of publication. Therefore, it seems that a sizeable percentage of school psychology research is not available for review by researchers or practitioners.