Clinical Science and the Replicability Crisis

Tackett, Jennifer L.; Lilienfeld, Scott O.; Patrick, Christopher J.; Johnson, Sheri L.; Krueger, Robert F.; Miller, Josh; Oltmanns, Thomas F.; Shrout, Patrick E.

doi:10.31234/osf.io/uwus7

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The extent to which concerns about replicability apply to psychopathology research is not yet well understood. Indeed, two of us (Tackett and Krueger) have recently contributed to efforts to encourage clinical psychological scientists to “lean in” to the replicability conversation that is taking place in other areas of psychological science (Tackett et al, 2016). Nevertheless, the papers in this special section do seem to delineate generally replicable (or at least reproducible) structural phenomena, partly because they are based on nontrivial samples.…”

Section: Nontrivial Sample Sizes and Replicabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Toward validation of a structural approach to conceptualizing psychopathology: A special section of the Journal of Abnormal Psychology.

Krueger

Tackett²,

MacDonald

2016

Journal of Abnormal Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Traditionally, psychopathology has been conceptualized in terms of polythetic categories derived from committee deliberations and enshrined in authoritative psychiatric nosologies-most notably the (DSM; American Psychiatric Association [APA], 2013). As the limitations of this form of classification have become evident, empirical data have been increasingly relied upon to investigate the structure of psychopathology. These efforts have borne fruit in terms of an increasingly consistent set of psychopathological constructs closely connected with similar personality constructs. However, the work of validating these constructs using convergent sources of data is an ongoing enterprise. This special section collects several new efforts to use structural approaches to study the validity of this empirically based organizational scheme for psychopathology. Inasmuch as a structural approach reflects the natural organization of psychopathology, it has great potential to facilitate comprehensive organization of information on the correlates of psychopathology, providing evidence for the convergent and discriminant validity of an empirical approach to classification. Here, we highlight several themes that emerge from this burgeoning literature. (PsycINFO Database Record

show abstract

Section: Nontrivial Sample Sizes and Replicabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Toward validation of a structural approach to conceptualizing psychopathology: A special section of the Journal of Abnormal Psychology.

Krueger

Tackett²,

MacDonald

2016

Journal of Abnormal Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These factors bring to fore, the need for comprehensiveness and meticulousness in the way we conduct our researches and analyze our research data. P-hacking would only lead to the churning out of tonnes of research papers, majority of which would be of lower quality: such studies when p-hacked cannot be replicated Tackett et al 5 In addition, some valuable findings from research could be easily concealed from the public if it does not seek to champion the cause for which a researcher undertook that study. It is worth noting that, if the rate of p-hacking is not curbed, the public's confidence in science and scientific findings would keep dwindling; and this would render scientific researches largely needless.…”

Section: Opinionmentioning

confidence: 99%

P-hacking: its implication for science and scientific research

Nartey¹

2018

AOVS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The globe has seen tremendous scientific inventions and technological advancements over the years. Inventions do not happen haphazardly but rather, it takes painstaking and rigorous application of scientific principles, bouncing ideas off one another, and the carrying out of experimental research studies. A number of indicators have been established to assess the precision of research findings. One of such notable indicators is the p-value, which denotes the statistical significance of a research finding. The manipulation and/or tweaking of research variables to obtain significant p-values have become an issue that have attracted considerable media interest and attention. This article serves to provide, in no uncertain terms, the researcher's perspective in relation to the manipulation using p-values, whilst reviewing related literature. The paper concludes with the implication this phenomenon has for science and scientific research.

show abstract

“…This might contribute to the lack of consensus between studies and affect findings' generalisation. Selection bias may thus fuel the so-called "replicability crisis" (Barch and Yarkoni, 2013;Gorgolewski and Poldrack, 2016;Tackett et al, 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patients participating to neurobiological research in early psychosis: A selected subgroup?

Golay

Baumann

Jenni³

et al. 2018

Schizophrenia Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Clinical Science and the Replicability Crisis

Abstract: Psychology is in the early stages of examining a crisis of replicability stemming from

Cited by 4 publications

References 33 publications

Toward validation of a structural approach to conceptualizing psychopathology: A special section of the Journal of Abnormal Psychology.

Toward validation of a structural approach to conceptualizing psychopathology: A special section of the Journal of Abnormal Psychology.

P-hacking: its implication for science and scientific research

Patients participating to neurobiological research in early psychosis: A selected subgroup?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About