Background: Many interventions, especially those linked to open science, have been proposed to improve reproducibility in science. To what extent these propositions are based on scientific evidence from empirical evaluations is not clear.
Aims: The primary objective is to identify Open Science interventions that have been formally investigated regarding their influence on reproducibility and replicability. A secondary objective is to list any facilitators or barriers reported and to identify gaps in the evidence.
Methods: We will search broadly by using electronic bibliographic databases, broad internet search, and contacting experts in the field of reproducibility, replicability, and open science. Any study investigating interventions for their influence on the reproducibility and replicability of research will be selected, including those studies additionally investigating drivers and barriers to the implementation and effectiveness of interventions. Studies will first be selected by title and abstract (if available) and then by reading the full text by at least two independent reviewers. We will analyze existing scientific evidence using scoping review and evidence gap mapping methodologies.
Results: The results will be presented in interactive evidence maps, summarized in a narrative synthesis, and serve as input for subsequent research.
Review registration: This protocol has been pre-registered on OSF under doi https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/D65YS.
Background: Problematic Hypersexuality (PH) is defined as a distress caused by hypersexuality, to the extent that seeking treatment is considered. PH was previously measured with instruments stemming from different perspectives on problems related to hypersexuality. These instruments might best be analyzed in unison to discover the most optimal set of characteristics to measure PH.
Methods: A total of 58 items were investigated with Item Response Theory (IRT). We included 1211 participants (592 women, 618 men, 1 other) from a representative Dutch general population sample of 18 years or older. In addition, 371 participants (116 women, 253 men, 2 other) in a web-based survey who sought information on their current level of PH were included. This latter group was divided into those that did or did not consider treatment and group differences in item averages were assessed.
Results: After item selection, 26 out of 58 items were retained and divided in two scales: Emotion Dysregulation-PH - 9 items representing the distressing emotional patterns coinciding with hypersexual preoccupation - and Negative Effects-PH - 17 items representing the negative consequences of patterns of hypersexual thoughts and behavior. Assumptions for IRT analyses were met (unidimensionality, local independence and monotonicity). After an IRT graded response model was fit, the scales showed sufficient reliability for the target population of hypersexual individuals. In the general population the scales showed large floor effects and were less reliable.
Conclusions: With this study a first step is taken in validating two complementary item banks to measure PH. Further development of the item banks should include the investigation of responsiveness. New items should be constructed to assess less-explored areas of PH and improve differentiating power of the scales. This study showed that diagnostic accuracy for PH is currently difficult to attain with a survey, even when using an extended item set representing the most unique characteristics of PH.