Reflexivity is the act of examining one's own assumptions, beliefs, and judgments, and thinking carefully and critically about how these influence the research process. The practice of reflexivity confronts and questions who we are as researchers and how this guides our research. It is central in debates on objectivity, subjectivity, and the very foundations of social science research and generated knowledge. Incorporating reflexivity in the research process is traditionally recognized as one of the most notable differences between qualitative and quantitative methodologies. Qualitative research centres and celebrates participants’ lived experience, and qualitative researchers are readily encouraged to consider how their own positionalities inform the research process, forming an important part of qualitative research training. Quantitative methodologies in social and personality psychology, on the other hand, have remained seemingly detached from this level of reflexivity and general reflective practises. In this commentary, we, three quantitative researchers who have grappled with the compatibility of reflexivity with our research, argue that reflexivity has much to offer quantitative methodologists, in social and personality psychology and beyond. The act of reflexivity prompts researchers to acknowledge and centre their positionalities, encourages a more thoughtful engagement with every step of the research process, and thus, as we argue, contributes to the ongoing reappraisal of openness and transparency in psychology. In this paper, we make the case for integrating reflexivity across all research approaches, before providing a ‘beginner’s guide’ for quantitative researchers wishing to engage reflexivity within their work, providing concrete recommendations, worked examples, and reflexivity prompts.

This preregistration template guides researchers who wish to preregister their EEG projects, more specifically studies investigating event-related potentials (ERPs) in the sensor space.

Ever-increasing anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions narrow the timeframe for humanity to mitigate the climate crisis. Scientific research activities are resource demanding and, consequently, contribute to climate change; at the same time, scientists have a central role in advancing knowledge, also on climate-related topics. In this opinion piece, we discuss (1) how open science – adopted on an individual as well as on a systemic level – can contribute to making research more environmentally friendly, and (2) how open science practices can make research activities more efficient and thereby foster scientific progress and solutions to the climate crises. While many building blocks are already at hand, systemic changes are necessary in order to create academic environments that support open science practices and encourage scientists from all fields to become more carbon-conscious, ultimately contributing to a sustainable future.