The “replication crisis” and trust in psychological science: How reforms shape public trust in psychology

Q2 Psychology Social Psychological Bulletin Pub Date : 2023-11-17 DOI:10.32872/spb.9665
Nicole Methner, Barbara Dahme, Claudia Menzel
{"title":"The “replication crisis” and trust in psychological science: How reforms shape public trust in psychology","authors":"Nicole Methner, Barbara Dahme, Claudia Menzel","doi":"10.32872/spb.9665","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Failed replications can jeopardize public trust in psychological science and recent findings cast doubt on the idea that self-corrections and reforms can rebuild this trust. These findings are in contrast to trust repair research that proposes changes in transparency, norms, and policies as trust repair mechanisms. This raises the question of whether the used experimental material is one reason behind these unexpected findings. Previous studies used short texts that may give too little information on the replication crisis and initiated reforms in the field. In a pre-registered experiment (N = 390), we, therefore, tested whether comprehensive information about the replication crisis and reforms increases public trust in psychology, compared to a control condition that only informs about the replication crisis. To give comprehensive information, we created an animated video for each experimental condition. After watching the video, participants indicated their trust in researchers, trust in past research findings, and trust in current research findings. As expected and in line with trust repair research, information about reforms increased trust in researchers and in current (vs. past) research, compared with information about the replication crisis and its causes only. We discuss the generalizability of our results and implications for communicating the replication crisis to the public.","PeriodicalId":32922,"journal":{"name":"Social Psychological Bulletin","volume":"10 1-2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Psychological Bulletin","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.32872/spb.9665","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Psychology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Failed replications can jeopardize public trust in psychological science and recent findings cast doubt on the idea that self-corrections and reforms can rebuild this trust. These findings are in contrast to trust repair research that proposes changes in transparency, norms, and policies as trust repair mechanisms. This raises the question of whether the used experimental material is one reason behind these unexpected findings. Previous studies used short texts that may give too little information on the replication crisis and initiated reforms in the field. In a pre-registered experiment (N = 390), we, therefore, tested whether comprehensive information about the replication crisis and reforms increases public trust in psychology, compared to a control condition that only informs about the replication crisis. To give comprehensive information, we created an animated video for each experimental condition. After watching the video, participants indicated their trust in researchers, trust in past research findings, and trust in current research findings. As expected and in line with trust repair research, information about reforms increased trust in researchers and in current (vs. past) research, compared with information about the replication crisis and its causes only. We discuss the generalizability of our results and implications for communicating the replication crisis to the public.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
复制危机 "与对心理科学的信任:改革如何塑造公众对心理学的信任
失败的复制会危及公众对心理科学的信任,而最近的研究结果让人对自我纠正和改革可以重建这种信任的想法产生了怀疑。这些研究结果与信任修复研究形成了鲜明对比,后者建议将透明度、规范和政策的改变作为信任修复机制。这就提出了一个问题,即所使用的实验材料是否是这些意外发现背后的原因之一。以前的研究使用的是短文,可能对复制危机和该领域启动的改革提供的信息太少。因此,在一项预先登记的实验(N = 390)中,我们测试了与只告知复制危机的对照条件相比,有关复制危机和改革的全面信息是否会增加公众对心理学的信任。为了提供全面的信息,我们为每个实验条件制作了一段动画视频。在观看视频后,参与者分别表达了他们对研究人员的信任、对过去研究成果的信任以及对当前研究成果的信任。正如预期的那样,与信任修复研究相一致的是,与只提供复制危机及其原因的信息相比,有关改革的信息增加了对研究人员和当前(相对于过去)研究的信任。我们将讨论结果的普遍性以及向公众宣传复制危机的意义。
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 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊最新文献
Correction of Paulina Banaszkiewicz (2022). Biological sex and psychological gender differences in the experience and expression of romantic jealousy Correction of Nathan Vidal et al. (2023). Assessing the reliability of an infrared thermography protocol to assess cold-induced brown adipose tissue activation in French psychology students Willingness to use moral reframing: Support comes from perceived effectiveness, opposition comes from integrity concerns Feeling bad about feeling good? how avengers and observers evaluate the hedonic pleasure of taking revenge Anticipated and achieved individual mobility amongst Portuguese immigrants in Switzerland: Social identity adjustment and inter-minority relations
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1