Open science practices in IWO psychology: Urban legends, misconceptions, and a false dichotomy

Abstract

Although we appreciate Guzzo et al., (2022) addressing the issue of open science practices (OSPs) and pointing out potential risks, we believe that their focal article is neither an accurate reflection of OSPs nor of the related perils. In our commentary, we highlight and elaborate the following four (partly) interrelated and problematic issues that run the risk of misrepresenting the usefulness of OSPs: (a) There are very good reasons why OSPs are currently discussed, although they are hardly mentioned by Guzzo and colleagues. The perils that the authors perceive are either (b) exaggerated and dramatized or (c) simply due to misconceptions related to OSPs on their part. (iv) Guzzo et al. see a dichotomy between different types of science within Industrial, Work, and Organizational (IWO) Psychology and suppose that the usefulness of OSPs is limited to only one of them (i.e., the hypothetico-deductive approach).