Abstract:In 2015, the Open Science Collaboration repeated a series of 100 psychological experiments. Since a considerable part of these replications could not confirm the original effects and some of them pointed in the opposite direction, psychological research is said to lack reproducibility. Several general criticisms can explain this finding, such as the standardized use of undirected nil-null hypothesis tests, samples being too small and selective, lack of corrections for multiple testing, but also some widespread questionable research practices and incentives to publish positive results only. A selection of 57,909 articles from 12 renowned journals is processed with the JATSdecoder software to analyze the extent to which several empirical research practices in psychology have changed over the past 12 years. To identify journal- and time-specific changes, the relative use of statistics based on p-values, the number of reported p-values per paper, the relative use of confidence intervals, directed tests, power analysis, Bayesian procedures, non-standard α levels, correction procedures for multiple testing, and median sample sizes are analyzed for articles published between 2010 and 2015 and after 2015, and in more detail for every included journal and year of publication. In addition, the origin of authorships is analyzed over time. Compared to articles that were published in and before 2015, the median number of reported p-values per article has decreased from 14 to 12, whereas the median proportion of significant p-values per article remained constant at 69%. While reports of effect sizes and confidence intervals have increased, the α level is usually set to the default value of .05. The use of corrections for multiple testing has decreased. Although uncommon in each case (4% in total), directed testing is used less frequently, while Bayesian inference has become more common after 2015. The overall median estimated sample size has increased from 105 to 190.

Quality, Replicability, and Transparency in Research in Social Psychology

Estimating the Prevalence of Transparency and Reproducibility-Related Research Practices in Psychology (2014–2017)

Changes in methodological study characteristics in psychology between 2010-2021

A discipline-wide investigation of the replicability of Psychology papers over the past two decades

The reproducibility of statistical results in psychological research: An investigation using unpublished raw data.

Evaluating the replicability of social science experiments in Nature and Science between 2010 and 2015

Raising the value of research studies in psychological science by increasing the credibility of research reports: the transparent Psi project

Interdisciplinary lessons and recommendations for the evaluation of replicability in behavioral sciences

The trustworthiness of the cumulative knowledge in industrial/organizational psychology: The current state of affairs and a path forward

Public attitudes towards social media field experiments

Are replications mainstream now? A comparison of support for replications expressed in the policies of social psychology journals in 2015 and 2022

Replication and Reproducibility in Cross-Cultural Psychology

Research into evidence-based psychological interventions needs a stronger focus on replicability

Tools of the Trade: A Guide to Sociodemographic Reporting for Researchers, Reviewers, and Editors

Some recommendations for doing high‐impact research in social psychological science

Computational Reproducibility in Computational Social Science

Responsible assessment of what research? Beware of epistemic diversity!

“Rarely safe to assume”: Evaluating the use and interpretation of manipulation checks in experimental social psychology

Hits and misses in the last decade of open science: Researchers from different subfields and career stages offer personal reflections and suggestions

Construct Validation of Experimental Manipulations in Social Psychology: Current Practices and Recommendations for the Future

What counts as good science? How the battle for methodological legitimacy affects public psychology.