Department of Psychology, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois 60208, USA; email:
Department of Psychology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195, USA.
Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2019 May 7;15:579-604. doi: 10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-050718-095710. Epub 2019 Jan 23.
Despite psychological scientists' increasing interest in replicability, open science, research transparency, and the improvement of methods and practices, the clinical psychology community has been slow to engage. This has been shifting more recently, and with this review, we hope to facilitate this emerging dialogue. We begin by examining some potential areas of weakness in clinical psychology in terms of methods, practices, and evidentiary base. We then discuss a select overview of solutions, tools, and current concerns of the reform movement from a clinical psychological science perspective. We examine areas of clinical science expertise (e.g., implementation science) that should be leveraged to inform open science and reform efforts. Finally, we reiterate the call to clinical psychologists to increase their efforts toward reform that can further improve the credibility of clinical psychological science.
尽管心理科学越来越关注可重复性、开放科学、研究透明度以及方法和实践的改进，但临床心理学界一直反应迟缓。最近这种情况有所改变，我们希望通过这篇综述来促进这一新兴的对话。我们首先从方法、实践和证据基础方面考察临床心理学的一些潜在弱点。然后，我们从临床心理学科学的角度讨论改革运动的一些有选择性的解决方案、工具和当前关注点。我们研究了应该利用临床科学专业知识（例如实施科学）的领域，以便为开放科学和改革努力提供信息。最后，我们再次呼吁临床心理学家加大改革力度，进一步提高临床心理学科学的可信度。
