The influence of journal submission guidelines on authors’ reporting of statistics and use of open research practices: Five years later

7Citations
Citations of this article
15Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Changes in statistical practices and reporting have been documented by Giofrè et al. PLOS ONE 12(4), e0175583 (2017), who investigated ten statistical and open practices in two high-ranking journals (Psychological Science [PS] and Journal of Experimental Psychology-General [JEPG]): null hypothesis significance testing; confidence or credible intervals; meta-analysis of the results of multiple experiments; confidence interval interpretation; effect size interpretation; sample size determination; data exclusion; data availability; materials availability; and preregistered design and analysis plan. The investigation was based on an analysis of all papers published in these journals between 2013 and 2015. The aim of the present study was to follow up changes in both PS and JEPG in subsequent years, from 2016 to 2020, adding code availability as a further open practice. We found improvement in most practices, with some exceptions (i.e., confidence interval interpretation and meta-analysis). Despite these positive changes, our results indicate a need for further improvements in statistical practices and adoption of open practices.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Giofrè, D., Boedker, I., Cumming, G., Rivella, C., & Tressoldi, P. (2023). The influence of journal submission guidelines on authors’ reporting of statistics and use of open research practices: Five years later. Behavior Research Methods, 55(7), 3845–3854. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-022-01993-3

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free