Three steps to open science for qualitative research in psychology

Abstract

Principles and applications of open science (also referred to as open research or open scholarship) in psychology have emerged in response to growing concerns about the replicability, transparency, reproducibility, and robustness of psychological research alongside global moves to open science in many fields. Our objective in this paper is to inform ways of collectively constructing open science practices andsystems that are appropriate to, and get the best out of, the full range of qualitative and mixed-method approaches used in psychology. We achieve this by describing three areas of

Editorial

“…We also expect that authors and reviewers will follow the recommendations outlined by the Journal Article Reporting Standards for Qualitative Research in preparing their manuscripts for submission (Levitt et al., 2018), as well as guidelines developed elsewhere (e.g., Chatfield, 2018). We encourage (but by no means expect or require) qualitative researchers to take advantage of new and improved preregistration templates for qualitative research (e.g., Haven et al., 2020) and to submit registered reports if these templates are applicable to their work (see Branney et al., 2023). These templates will not necessarily be appropriate for all qualitative research; however, they are inclusive of many methods (e.g., ethnography, focus groups, participatory action research), analytic strategies (e.g., thematic analysis, grounded theory, phenomenological analysis), and credibility strategies (e.g., triangulation, member checking, multivoiced texts, etc.).…”

Opportunities, challenges and tensions: Open science through a lens of qualitative social psychology

“…In such cases, Baum et al (2023) contend that the traditional emphasis on the first author, or indeed the last author, obscures other author subjectivities in relation to published findings. Having outlined their case for change (see also, Branney et al, 2022) in proposing a shift to using a contribution system (i.e. CRediT; see, Allen et al, 2014), which enables the contribution of each researcher to be recognized.…”

“…The next three papers can be understood as variously considering the practice of sharing data (although they are not exclusively about data sharing), so that data might be ‘accessed and used by others’ (FORRT, 2021; for an introduction to open data for qualitative methods, see Branney et al, 2022). First, Annayah Prosser et al (2023) explore the role of journals and academic publishers in sharing research data.…”

A Transparency Checklist for Qualitative Research

“…Transparent research is an ideal, and transparency is best understood on a continuum: research can be more or less transparent and, all things being equal, we should strive to move our practices towards the transparent end of that continuum. By providing practical guidance for more open, transparent qualitative research, we add to a growing literature on openness in qualitative research, including on such topics as pre-registration [19], authorship [20], consent for sharing data [21][22][23], and de-identifying and sharing sensitive qualitative data [24,25].…”