Results Blind Science Publishing and a Decision-Theoretic Approach to Publishing

IF 2.5 3区心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL

Basic and Applied Social Psychology Pub Date : 2022-01-02 DOI:10.1080/01973533.2022.2047048

J. Locascio

{"title":"Results Blind Science Publishing and a Decision-Theoretic Approach to Publishing","authors":"J. Locascio","doi":"10.1080/01973533.2022.2047048","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In this paper, I revisit my earlier proposal for Results Blind Publishing (RBP) and have added some new perspectives and qualifications regarding it. RBP is a suggestion that research journals decide on publication of submitted manuscripts based on reviewing only their Introduction section (which suggests the substantive importance of the research question addressed by the study) and Methods section (which suggests how likely the study validly answers that question), as a means of avoiding publication bias based on what the results are claimed to be, a bias that exacerbates replicability problems. I differentiate the separate questions of: (1) what should be the criteria for a positive as opposed to null research finding versus (2) what should be the criteria for publication of manuscripts. I believe the conflation of these two different questions fuels some of the controversies and confusion concerning null hypothesis significance testing and similar issues. I also compare the pros and cons of RBP versus the practice of preregistering studies. Further, I cite a potentially serious problem with RBP and suggest a fix-up involving a decision theoretic approach to manuscript publication.","PeriodicalId":48014,"journal":{"name":"Basic and Applied Social Psychology","volume":"44 1","pages":"38 - 46"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Basic and Applied Social Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01973533.2022.2047048","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract In this paper, I revisit my earlier proposal for Results Blind Publishing (RBP) and have added some new perspectives and qualifications regarding it. RBP is a suggestion that research journals decide on publication of submitted manuscripts based on reviewing only their Introduction section (which suggests the substantive importance of the research question addressed by the study) and Methods section (which suggests how likely the study validly answers that question), as a means of avoiding publication bias based on what the results are claimed to be, a bias that exacerbates replicability problems. I differentiate the separate questions of: (1) what should be the criteria for a positive as opposed to null research finding versus (2) what should be the criteria for publication of manuscripts. I believe the conflation of these two different questions fuels some of the controversies and confusion concerning null hypothesis significance testing and similar issues. I also compare the pros and cons of RBP versus the practice of preregistering studies. Further, I cite a potentially serious problem with RBP and suggest a fix-up involving a decision theoretic approach to manuscript publication.

查看原文本刊更多论文

结果盲科学出版与出版决策理论方法

摘要在本文中，我重新审视了我之前提出的结果盲出版（RBP），并添加了一些新的视角和条件。RBP是一种建议，即研究期刊仅根据其引言部分（这表明了研究所涉及的研究问题的实质性重要性）和方法部分（表明了研究有效回答该问题的可能性）来决定发表提交的手稿，作为一种避免基于结果的发表偏见的手段，这种偏见加剧了可复制性问题。我区分了以下两个单独的问题：（1）积极研究结果与无效研究结果的标准应该是什么，以及（2）手稿出版的标准应该什么。我认为，这两个不同问题的混淆加剧了关于零假设显著性检验和类似问题的一些争议和困惑。我还比较了RBP与预注册研究的利弊。此外，我引用了RBP的一个潜在严重问题，并建议采用决策论方法来解决手稿出版问题。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Basic and Applied Social Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL-

CiteScore

4.50

自引率

12.50%

发文量

期刊介绍： Basic and Applied Social Psychology (BASP) emphasizes the publication of outstanding research articles, but also considers literature reviews, criticism, and methodological or theoretical statements spanning the entire range of social psychological issues. The journal will publish basic work in areas of social psychology that can be applied to societal problems, as well as direct application of social psychology to such problems. The journal provides a venue for a broad range of specialty areas, including research on legal and political issues, environmental influences on behavior, organizations, aging, medical and health-related outcomes, sexuality, education and learning, the effects of mass media, gender issues, and population problems.