Forschungstransparenz als hohes wissenschaftliches Gut stärken

Zusammenfassung. Gros angelegte Replikationsprojekte der letzten Jahre legen ein aus unserer Sicht beunruhigendes Ausmas an nicht-replizierbaren Befunden in der wissenschaftlichen Literatur nahe, sowohl in der Psychologie als auch in anderen Disziplinen. Basierend auf einer Analyse einiger Ursachen dieser Situation argumentieren wir, dass der Wandel hin zu einer offenen Wissenschaft („Open Science“) eine Konsequenz aus der Glaubwurdigkeitskrise sein muss. Wir pladieren fur konkrete und machbare Anderungen in den Arbeitseinheiten und Instituten vor Ort, und zeigen exemplarisch, welche Schritte am Department Psychologie der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitat Munchen umgesetzt wurden. Diese Schritte betreffen Anreizstrukturen, die Forschungskultur, die Lehre und die Verzahnung mit der Ethikkommission. Sie haben das Ziel, eine reproduzierbarere und glaubwurdigere Forschung zu unterstutzen, ohne unnotige burokratische Belastungen zu erzeugen.

[1]  S. Muthukumaraswamy,et al.  Instead of "playing the game" it is time to change the rules: Registered Reports at AIMS Neuroscience and beyond , 2014 .

[2]  C. Begley,et al.  Drug development: Raise standards for preclinical cancer research , 2012, Nature.

[3]  James A. J. Heathers,et al.  The GRIM Test , 2017 .

[4]  W. Vanpaemel,et al.  Are We Wasting a Good Crisis? The Availability of Psychological Research Data after the Storm , 2015 .

[5]  Frank Renkewitz,et al.  Belastbare und effiziente Wissenschaft: Strategische Ausrichtung von Forschungsprozessen als Weg aus der Replikationskrise , 2018 .

[6]  C. Engel Scientific Disintegrity as a Public Bad , 2015, Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

[7]  Leif D. Nelson,et al.  False-Positive Psychology , 2011, Psychological science.

[8]  Francis Tuerlinckx,et al.  Increasing Transparency Through a Multiverse Analysis , 2016, Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

[9]  G. Loewenstein,et al.  Measuring the Prevalence of Questionable Research Practices With Incentives for Truth Telling , 2012, Psychological science.

[10]  Han L. J. van der Maas,et al.  Science Perspectives on Psychological an Agenda for Purely Confirmatory Research on Behalf Of: Association for Psychological Science , 2022 .

[11]  Nicholas Eubank,et al.  Lessons from a Decade of Replications at the Quarterly Journal of Political Science , 2016, PS: Political Science & Politics.

[12]  A. Gelman,et al.  The statistical crisis in science , 2014 .

[13]  K. Fiedler,et al.  Questionable Research Practices Revisited , 2016 .

[14]  Reginald B. Adams,et al.  Investigating Variation in Replicability: A “Many Labs” Replication Project , 2014 .

[15]  J. Wicherts,et al.  The Rules of the Game Called Psychological Science , 2012, Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

[16]  Maxine B. Najle,et al.  A Powerful Nudge? Presenting Calculable Consequences of Underpowered Research Shifts Incentives Toward Adequately Powered Designs , 2015 .

[17]  Brian A. Nosek,et al.  Registered Reports A Method to Increase the Credibility of Published Results , 2014 .

[18]  Melissa S. Anderson,et al.  Normative Dissonance in Science: Results from a National Survey of U.S. Scientists , 2007, Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE.

[19]  F. Prinz,et al.  Believe it or not: how much can we rely on published data on potential drug targets? , 2011, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[20]  Marcus R. Munafò,et al.  Current Incentives for Scientists Lead to Underpowered Studies with Erroneous Conclusions , 2016, PLoS biology.

[21]  Überlegungen zur Optimierung von Berufungsverfahren in der Psychologie , 2016 .

[22]  R. Giner-Sorolla,et al.  Science or Art? How Aesthetic Standards Grease the Way Through the Publication Bottleneck but Undermine Science , 2012, Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

[23]  N. Tinbergen On aims and methods of Ethology , 2010 .

[24]  J. Wicherts,et al.  Willingness to Share Research Data Is Related to the Strength of the Evidence and the Quality of Reporting of Statistical Results , 2011, PloS one.

[25]  Michael C. Frank,et al.  Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science , 2015, Science.

[26]  John P A Ioannidis Handling the fragile vase of scientific practices. , 2015, Addiction.

[27]  Brian A. Nosek,et al.  Recommendations for Increasing Replicability in Psychology † , 2013 .

[28]  D. Borsboom,et al.  The poor availability of psychological research data for reanalysis. , 2006, The American psychologist.

[29]  Leif D. Nelson,et al.  Let's Publish Fewer Papers , 2012 .

[30]  A. Lupia What Is the Value of Social Science? Challenges for Researchers and Government Funders , 2013, PS: Political Science & Politics.

[31]  Brian A. Nosek,et al.  Scientific Utopia , 2012, Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.