...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of personality and social psychology >Best Research Practices in Psychology: Illustrating Epistemological and Pragmatic Considerations With the Case of Relationship Science
【24h】

Best Research Practices in Psychology: Illustrating Epistemological and Pragmatic Considerations With the Case of Relationship Science

机译：心理学最佳研究实践：以关系科学为例说明认识论和语用学方面的考虑

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

In recent years, a robust movement has emerged within psychology to increase the evidentiary value of our science. This movement, which has analogs throughout the empirical sciences, is broad and diverse, but its primary emphasis has been on the reduction of statistical false positives. The present article addresses epistemological and pragmatic issues that we, as a field, must consider as we seek to maximize the scientific value of this movement. Regarding epistemology, this article contrasts the false-positives-reduction (FPR) approach with an alternative, the error balance (EB) approach, which argues that any serious consideration of optimal scientific practice must contend simultaneously with both false-positive and false-negative errors. Regarding pragmatics, the movement has devoted a great deal of attention to issues that frequently arise in laboratory experiments and one-shot survey studies, but it has devoted less attention to issues that frequently arise in intensive and/or longitudinal studies. We illustrate these epistemological and pragmatic considerations with the case of relationship science, one of the many research domains that frequently employ intensive and/or longitudinal methods. Specifically, we examine 6 research prescriptions that can help to reduce false-positive rates: preregistration, prepublication sharing of materials, postpublication sharing of data, close replication, avoiding piecemeal publication, and increasing sample size. For each, we offer concrete guidance not only regarding how researchers can improve their research practices and balance the risk of false-positive and false-negative errors, but also how the movement can capitalize upon insights from research practices within relationship science to make the movement stronger and more inclusive.
机译：近年来，心理学中出现了一种强劲的运动，以增加我们科学的证据价值。这个运动在整个经验科学领域都具有类似性，它是广泛而多样的，但其主要重点是减少统计误报。本文探讨了认识论和实用主义问题，作为一个领域，我们在寻求最大限度地提高这一运动的科学价值时必须考虑这些问题。关于认识论，本文将假阳性减少（FPR）方法与错误平衡（EB）方法进行了比较，该方法认为，对最佳科学实践的任何认真考虑都必须同时提出假阳性和假阴性错误。关于语用学，该运动对实验室实验和单次调查研究中经常出现的问题投入了大量精力，但对密集和/或纵向研究中经常出现的问题的关注较少。我们以关系科学为例说明这些认识论和务实的考虑，关系科学是经常采用强化和/或纵向方法的众多研究领域之一。具体来说，我们研究了6种有助于降低假阳性率的研究处方：预注册，材料的出版前共享，数据出版后共享，紧密复制，避免零散出版和增加样本量。对于每个人，我们不仅提供有关研究人员如何改善他们的研究实践并平衡假阳性和假阴性错误风险的具体指导，而且还为运动如何利用关系科学领域的研究实践的见解进行运动提供具体指导。更强大，更具包容性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号