Advocating for the credibility revolution


METADATA ONLY
Loading...

Author / Producer

Date

2020-03-20

Publication Type

Journal Article

ETH Bibliography

no

Citations

Altmetric
METADATA ONLY

Data

Rights / License

Abstract

The credibility of psychological science has been questioned recently, due to low levels of reproducibility and the routine use of inadequate research practices (Chambers, 2017; Open Science Collaboration, 2015; Simmons, Nelson, & Simonsohn, 2011). In response, wide-ranging reform to scientific practice has been proposed (e.g., Munafò et al., 2017), which has been dubbed a “credibility revolution” (Vazire, 2018). My aim here is to advocate why and how we should embrace such reform, and discuss the likely implications.

Publication status

published

Editor

Book title

Volume

5

Pages / Article No.

70 - 73

Publisher

The British Psychological Society

Event

Edition / version

Methods

Software

Geographic location

Date collected

Date created

Subject

Organisational unit

09800 - Cross, Emily S. / Cross, Emily S. check_circle

Notes

Funding

Related publications and datasets