QRP_review_guidelines - reading list
 Share
The version of the browser you are using is no longer supported. Please upgrade to a supported browser.Dismiss

 
£
%
123
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZAAABACADAEAFAGAHAIAJAKALAMANAOAPAQARASATAUAVAWAXAYAZBABBBCBDBEBFBGBHBIBJBKBLBMBNBOBPBQBRBSBTBUBVBWBXBYBZCACBCCCDCECFCGCHCI
1
Publication YearAuthorTitlePublication TitleDOIUrl
2
2012NeuroskepticThe Nine Circles of Scientific HellPerspectives on Psychological Science10.1177/1745691612459519http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1745691612459519
3
2011Simmons, Joseph P.; Nelson, Leif D.; Simonsohn, UriFalse-Positive Psychology: Undisclosed Flexibility in Data Collection and Analysis Allows Presenting Anything as SignificantPsychological Science10.1177/0956797611417632http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0956797611417632
4
2008Young, Neal S; Ioannidis, John P. A; Al-Ubaydli, OmarWhy Current Publication Practices May Distort SciencePLoS Medicine10.1371/journal.pmed.0050201http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0050201
5
2014Hardwicke, Tom E.; Jameel, Leila; Jones, Matthew; Walczak, Eryk J.; Magis-Weinberg, LucíaOnly Human: Scientists, Systems, and Suspect StatisticsOpticon182610.5334/opt.chhttp://www.opticon1826.com/articles/10.5334/opt.ch/
6
2012Nosek, Brian A.; Spies, Jeffrey R.; Motyl, MattScientific Utopia: II. Restructuring Incentives and Practices to Promote Truth Over PublishabilityPerspectives on Psychological Science10.1177/1745691612459058http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1745691612459058
7
2012Schimmack, UlrichThe ironic effect of significant results on the credibility of multiple-study articles.Psychological Methods10.1037/a0029487http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/a0029487
8
1991Cicchetti, Domenic V.The reliability of peer review for manuscript and grant submissions: A cross-disciplinary investigationBehavioral and Brain Sciences10.1017/S0140525X00065675http://www.journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0140525X00065675
9
2005Gardner, William; Lidz, Charles W.; Hartwig, Kathryn C.Authors' reports about research integrity problems in clinical trialsContemporary Clinical Trials10.1016/j.cct.2004.11.013http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S155171440500008X
10
2008Schroter, Sara; Black, Nick; Evans, Stephen; Godlee, Fiona; Osorio, Lyda; Smith, RichardWhat errors do peer reviewers detect, and does training improve their ability to detect them?Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine10.1258/jrsm.2008.080062http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1258/jrsm.2008.080062
11
1992Martin, BrianSCIENTIFIC FRAUD AND THE POWER STRUCTURE OF SCIENCEPrometheus10.1080/08109029208629515https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08109029208629515
12
2008Sovacool, Benjamin K.Exploring Scientific Misconduct: Isolated Individuals, Impure Institutions, or an Inevitable Idiom of Modern Science?Journal of Bioethical Inquiry10.1007/s11673-008-9113-6http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11673-008-9113-6
13
2018Parker, Timothy H.; Griffith, Simon C.; Bronstein, Judith L.; Fidler, Fiona; Foster, Susan; Fraser, Hannah; Forstmeier, Wolfgang; Gurevitch, Jessica; Koricheva, Julia; Seppelt, Ralf; Tingley, Morgan W.; Nakagawa, ShinichiEmpowering peer reviewers with a checklist to improve transparencyNature Ecology & Evolution10.1038/s41559-018-0545-zhttp://www.nature.com/articles/s41559-018-0545-z
14
1982Peters, Douglas P.; Ceci, Stephen J.Peer-review practices of psychological journals: The fate of published articles, submitted againBehavioral and Brain Sciences10.1017/S0140525X00011183http://www.journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0140525X00011183
15
1989Marsh, Herbert W.; Ball, SamuelThe Peer Review Process Used to Evaluate Manuscripts Submitted to Academic Journals: Interjudgmental ReliabilityThe Journal of Experimental Education10.1080/00220973.1989.10806503http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00220973.1989.10806503
16
2017Tennant, Jonathan P.; Dugan, Jonathan M.; Graziotin, Daniel; Jacques, Damien C.; Waldner, François; Mietchen, Daniel; Elkhatib, Yehia; B. Collister, Lauren; Pikas, Christina K.; Crick, Tom; Masuzzo, Paola; Caravaggi, Anthony; Berg, Devin R.; Niemeyer, Kyle E.; Ross-Hellauer, Tony; Mannheimer, Sara; Rigling, Lillian; Katz, Daniel S.; Greshake Tzovaras, Bastian; Pacheco-Mendoza, Josmel; Fatima, Nazeefa; Poblet, Marta; Isaakidis, Marios; Irawan, Dasapta Erwin; Renaut, Sébastien; Madan, Christopher R.; Matthias, Lisa; Nørgaard Kjær, Jesper; O'Donnell, Daniel Paul; Neylon, Cameron; Kearns, Sarah; Selvaraju, Manojkumar; Colomb, JulienA multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer reviewF1000Research10.12688/f1000research.12037.3https://f1000research.com/articles/6-1151/v3
17
2017Brown, Nicholas J. L.; Heathers, James A. J.The GRIM Test: A Simple Technique Detects Numerous Anomalies in the Reporting of Results in PsychologySocial Psychological and Personality Science10.1177/1948550616673876http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1948550616673876
18
2017Luck, Steven J.; Gaspelin, NicholasHow to get statistically significant effects in any ERP experiment (and why you shouldn't): How to get significant effectsPsychophysiology10.1111/psyp.12639http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/psyp.12639
19
2016Higginson, Andrew D.; Munafò, Marcus R.Current Incentives for Scientists Lead to Underpowered Studies with Erroneous ConclusionsPLOS Biology10.1371/journal.pbio.2000995http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.2000995
20
2017O’Boyle, Ernest Hugh; Banks, George Christopher; Gonzalez-Mulé, ErikThe Chrysalis Effect: How Ugly Initial Results Metamorphosize Into Beautiful ArticlesJournal of Management10.1177/0149206314527133http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0149206314527133
21
2015Patel, Chirag J.; Burford, Belinda; Ioannidis, John P.A.Assessment of vibration of effects due to model specification can demonstrate the instability of observational associationsJournal of Clinical Epidemiology10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.05.029http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0895435615002772
22
2016Bouter, Lex M.; Tijdink, Joeri; Axelsen, Nils; Martinson, Brian C.; ter Riet, GerbenRanking major and minor research misbehaviors: results from a survey among participants of four World Conferences on Research IntegrityResearch Integrity and Peer Review10.1186/s41073-016-0024-5http://researchintegrityjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s41073-016-0024-5
23
2017Forstmeier, Wolfgang; Wagenmakers, Eric-Jan; Parker, Timothy H.Detecting and avoiding likely false-positive findings - a practical guide: Avoiding false-positive findingsBiological Reviews10.1111/brv.12315http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/brv.12315
24
2017Yarkoni, Tal; Westfall, JacobChoosing Prediction Over Explanation in Psychology: Lessons From Machine LearningPerspectives on Psychological Science10.1177/1745691617693393http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1745691617693393
25
2014Ioannidis, John P.A.; Munafò, Marcus R.; Fusar-Poli, Paolo; Nosek, Brian A.; David, Sean P.Publication and other reporting biases in cognitive sciences: detection, prevalence, and preventionTrends in Cognitive Sciences10.1016/j.tics.2014.02.010http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1364661314000540
26
2017Nuijten, Michele; van Assen, Marcel; Hartgerink, Chris; Epskamp, Sacha; Wicherts, JelteThe Validity of the Tool “statcheck” in Discovering Statistical Reporting Inconsistencies10.17605/osf.io/tcxaj
27
Heathers, James A; Anaya, Jordan; van der Zee, Tim; Brown, Nicholas JLRecovering data from summary statistics: Sample Parameter Reconstruction via Iterative TEchniques (SPRITE)10.7287/peerj.preprints.26968v1https://peerj.com/preprints/26968
28
2015Simonsohn, Uri; Simmons, Joseph P.; Nelson, Leif D.Specification Curve: Descriptive and Inferential Statistics on All Reasonable SpecificationsSSRN Electronic Journal10.2139/ssrn.2694998http://www.ssrn.com/abstract=2694998
29
1994Goodman, S. N.; Berlin, J.; Fletcher, S. W.; Fletcher, R. H.Manuscript quality before and after peer review and editing at Annals of Internal MedicineAnnals of Internal Medicine
30
1977Mahoney, Michael J.Publication prejudices: An experimental study of confirmatory bias in the peer review systemCognitive Therapy and Research10.1007/BF01173636http://link.springer.com/10.1007/BF01173636
31
2018Tennant, JonathanThe State of The Art in Peer Review10.17605/osf.io/c29tmhttps://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/c29tm/
32
2017Wicherts, JelteThe Weak Spots in Contemporary Science (and How to Fix Them)Animals10.3390/ani7120090http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/7/12/90
33
2018Grimes, David Robert; Bauch, Chris T.; Ioannidis, John P. A.Modelling science trustworthiness under publish or perish pressureRoyal Society Open Science10.1098/rsos.171511http://rsos.royalsocietypublishing.org/lookup/doi/10.1098/rsos.171511
34
2017Bareille, Reine; Baudouin-Massot, Béatrice; Carreno, Marie Paule; Fournier, Sandra; Lebret, Nelly; Remy-Jouet, Isabelle; Giesen, EvaPreventive actions to avoid questionable research practices. Use of EERM (Ethical and Efficient Research Management) during Arrival and Departure of a co-worker★International Journal of Metrology and Quality Engineering10.1051/ijmqe/2016029http://www.metrology-journal.org/10.1051/ijmqe/2016029
35
2017Agnoli, Franca; Wicherts, Jelte M.; Veldkamp, Coosje L. S.; Albiero, Paolo; Cubelli, RobertoQuestionable research practices among italian research psychologistsPLOS ONE10.1371/journal.pone.0172792http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0172792
36
2016Bierman, Dick J.; Spottiswoode, James P.; Bijl, AronTesting for Questionable Research Practices in a Meta-Analysis: An Example from Experimental ParapsychologyPLOS ONE10.1371/journal.pone.0153049http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0153049
37
2016Banks, George C.; Rogelberg, Steven G.; Woznyj, Haley M.; Landis, Ronald S.; Rupp, Deborah E.Editorial: Evidence on Questionable Research Practices: The Good, the Bad, and the UglyJournal of Business and Psychology10.1007/s10869-016-9456-7http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10869-016-9456-7
38
2015Vermeulen, Ivar; Hartmann, TiloQuestionable Research and Publication Practices in Communication ScienceCommunication Methods and Measures10.1080/19312458.2015.1096331http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/19312458.2015.1096331
39
2016Sijtsma, KlaasPlaying with Data—Or How to Discourage Questionable Research Practices and Stimulate Researchers to Do Things RightPsychometrika10.1007/s11336-015-9446-0http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11336-015-9446-0
40
2015Rajah-Kanagasabai, Camilla J.; Roberts, Lynne D.Predicting self-reported research misconduct and questionable research practices in university students using an augmented Theory of Planned BehaviorFrontiers in Psychology10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00535http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00535/abstract
41
2015Matthes, Jörg; Marquart, Franziska; Naderer, Brigitte; Arendt, Florian; Schmuck, Desirée; Adam, KarolineQuestionable Research Practices in Experimental Communication Research: A Systematic Analysis From 1980 to 2013Communication Methods and Measures10.1080/19312458.2015.1096334http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/19312458.2015.1096334
42
2016Fiedler, Klaus; Schwarz, NorbertQuestionable Research Practices RevisitedSocial Psychological and Personality Science10.1177/1948550615612150http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1948550615612150
43
2012Pashler, Harold; Wagenmakers, Eric–JanEditors’ Introduction to the Special Section on Replicability in Psychological Science: A Crisis of Confidence?Perspectives on Psychological Science10.1177/1745691612465253http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1745691612465253
44
2012Bakker, Marjan; van Dijk, Annette; Wicherts, Jelte M.The Rules of the Game Called Psychological SciencePerspectives on Psychological Science10.1177/1745691612459060http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1745691612459060
45
2012Open Science CollaborationAn Open, Large-Scale, Collaborative Effort to Estimate the Reproducibility of Psychological SciencePerspectives on Psychological Science10.1177/1745691612462588http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1745691612462588
46
2009Fanelli, DanieleHow Many Scientists Fabricate and Falsify Research? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Survey DataPLoS ONE10.1371/journal.pone.0005738http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0005738
47
1992Responsible Science, Volume I: Ensuring the Integrity of the Research Processhttp://www.nap.edu/catalog/1864
48
Schimmack, UlrichThe Test of Insufficient Variance (TIVA): A New Tool for the Detection of Questionable Research Practiceshttps://replicationindex.wordpress.com/2014/12/30/the-test-of-insufficient-variance-tiva-a-new-tool-for-the-detection-of-questionable-research-practices/
49
2017Butler, Nick; Delaney, Helen; Spoelstra, SverreThe Gray Zone: Questionable Research Practices in the Business SchoolAcademy of Management Learning & Education10.5465/amle.2015.0201http://journals.aom.org/doi/10.5465/amle.2015.0201
50
2006Steneck, Nicholas H.Fostering integrity in research: Definitions, current knowledge, and future directionsScience and Engineering Ethics10.1007/PL00022268http://link.springer.com/10.1007/PL00022268
51
2005Martinson, Brian C.; Anderson, Melissa S.; de Vries, RaymondScientists behaving badlyNature10.1038/435737ahttp://www.nature.com/articles/435737a
52
1996Husted, Bryan W.; Dozier, Janelle Brinker; McMahon, J. Timothy; Kattan, Michael W.The Impact of Cross-National Carriers of Business Ethics on Attitudes about Questionable Practices and Form of Moral ReasoningJournal of International Business Studies10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490141http://link.springer.com/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490141
53
1993SwazeyEthical Problems in Academic Researchhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/29775057 .
54
2016Ingre, MichealRecent reproducibility estimates indicate that negative evidence is observed 30200 times before publication
55
2012Nebeker, CamilleLearning Theories and Principles Applied to Responsible Conduct of Research Instruction
56
1958Riley, JohnProceedings of the Thirteenth Conference on Public Opinion Researchhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/2746656
57
2016Wicherts, Jelte M.; Veldkamp, Coosje L. S.; Augusteijn, Hilde E. M.; Bakker, Marjan; van Aert, Robbie C. M.; van Assen, Marcel A. L. M.Degrees of Freedom in Planning, Running, Analyzing, and Reporting Psychological Studies: A Checklist to Avoid p-HackingFrontiers in Psychology10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01832http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01832/full
58
2016Wigboldus, Daniel H. J.; Dotsch, RonEncourage Playing with Data and Discourage Questionable Reporting PracticesPsychometrika
10.1007/s11336-015-9445-1
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11336-015-9445-1
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
Loading...