From old school to open science: The implications of new research norms for educational psychology and beyond

Abstract

Recently, scholars have noted how several "old-school" practices-a host of long-standing scientific norms-in combination, sometimes compromise the credibility of research. In response, other scholarly fields have developed several "open-science" norms and practices to address these credibility issues. Against this backdrop, this special issue explores the extent to which and how these norms should be adopted and adapted for educational psychology and education more broadly. Our introductory article contextualizes the special issue's goals by overviewing the historical context that led to open science norms (particularly in medicine and psychology); providing a conceptual map to illustrate the interrelationships between various old-school as well as open-science practices; and then describing educational psychologists' opportunity to benefit from and contribute to the translation of these norms to novel research contexts. We conclude by previewing the articles in the special issue. Adopting and adapting open scienceCognitively, we knew that the mere act of preregistering studies was not enough to ensure the level of rigor we sought in our work. But the painful experiential learning gained from these replication attempts proved to be a much

Application of Educational Psychology-Based Dance Therapy in College Students’ Life Education

“…The research process has found some defects in pedagogy. These deficiencies are supplemented and improved through the study of EP ( Gehlbach and Robinson, 2021 ).…”

Improving Pedagogy through Registered Reports

“…It is our arguement that people are more willing to accept amendments to their project at the design phase than at the completed phase, creating a more collegiate and discursive approach to peer review, which can only be to the benefit of science through the publication of more transparent methods and reliable findings. Furthermore, Gehlbach and Robinson (2021) points out that other transparent practices, such as pre-registering hypotheses and analyses, are not necessarily sufficient in ensuring better research practices and hence we believe that an outside review of the theory, methods, and analytical plan of a study before data collection can better show transparency and increase confidence in the conclusions.…”

“…That said, Gehlbach and Robinson (2021) postulated that within the field of educational psychology there is an uneven distribution of knowledge about the practices that lead to less credible research; it is not the case that all researchers are deliberately creating less reliable research, many are just not aware of the issue. And so, if replications, considered to be the gold standard in science and the approach that instils most confidence in research, are heavily under-used, potentially for reasons relating to the lack of novelty or, more simply, difficulty in replicating the study, and the current publication system ripe for the influx of questionable research, it would be pertinent to normalise an alternative approach to publishing research that counters these issues.…”

Open accessibility in education research: Enhancing the credibility, equity, impact, and efficiency of research

“…That is, other researchers can confirm the accuracy of reported findings by independently conducting the same analyses with the same data. Indeed, a recent Pew Research Center survey reported that among a sample of 3,627 U.S. adults, 57% said that they trust scientific research findings more when data are openly available (Funk, 2020).…”