Abstract:Abstract The crisis of confidence in the social sciences has many corollaries which impact our research practices. One of these is a push towards maximal and mechanical objectivity in quantitative research. This stance is reinforced by major journals and academic institutions that subtly yet certainly link objectivity with integrity and rigor. The converse implication of this may be an association between subjectivity and low quality. Subjectivity is one of qualitative methodology’s best assets, however. In qualitative methodology, that subjectivity is often given voice through reflexivity. It is used to better understand our own role within the research process, and is a means through which the researcher may oversee how they influence their research. Given that the actions of researchers have led to the poor reproducibility characterising the crisis of confidence, it is worthwhile to consider whether reflexivity can help improve the validity of research findings in quantitative psychology. In this report, we describe a combination approach of research: the data of a series of interviews helps us elucidate the link between reflexive practice and quality of research, through the eyes of practicing academics. Through our exploration of the position of the researcher in their research, we shed light on how the reflections of the researcher can impact the quality of their research findings, in the context of the current crisis of confidence. The validity of these findings is tempered, however, by limitations to the sample, and we advise caution on the part of our audience in their reading of our conclusions.

Explaining One Subjective Variable with Another : A Methodological Clarification

Assessing the Unobserved: Enhancing Causal Inference in Sociology with Sensitivity Analysis

Two Approaches to Counterfactual Decomposition Clarification and Illustration

The Endogeneity Problem in Quantitative Analysis:A Review of Estimating Causal Effects of Social Interaction

Mastering the Use of Control Variables: the Hierarchical Iterative Control (HIC) Approach

Where the Model Frequently Meets the Road: Combining Statistical, Formal, and Case Study Methods

Subjective logic as a complementary tool to meta-analysis to explicitly address second-order uncertainty in research findings: A case from infant studies

Method Bias Mechanisms and Procedural Remedies

Real Effect or Bias? Good Practices for Evaluating the Robustness of Evidence From Comparative Observational Studies Through Quantitative Sensitivity Analysis for Unmeasured Confounding

Experimenter as automaton; experimenter as human: exploring the position of the researcher in scientific research

Automating the Selection of Proxy Variables of Unmeasured Confounders

Sensitivity Analysis for Unmeasured Confounding in the Estimation of Marginal Causal Effects

A metacognitive approach to understanding what marker variables measure

Avoiding overadjustment bias in social epidemiology through appropriate covariate selection: a primer

Towards counterfactual fairness thorough auxiliary variables

Hedges, mottes, and baileys: Causally ambiguous statistical language can increase perceived study quality and policy relevance

On Detecting Systematic Measurement Error in Cross-Cultural Research: A Review and Critical Reflection on Equivalence and Invariance Tests

A Causal View on Bias in Missing Data Imputation: The Impact of Evil Auxiliary Variables on Norming of Test Scores

Uncertainty of Statistical Models and Propensity Score Methods

Toward Unique and Unbiased Causal Effect Estimation From Data With Hidden Variables

Remarks on the analysis of causal relationships in population research