School of Applied Psychology, Griffith University, Australia.
Department of Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles, USA.
Behav Res Ther. 2020 Jan;124:103499. doi: 10.1016/j.brat.2019.103499. Epub 2019 Oct 26.
Addressing the 'replication crisis' and questionable research practices are at the forefront of international research agendas in clinical psychological science. The aim of this paper is to consider how the quality of research practices can be improved by a specific focus on publication practices. Currently, the responsibility for documenting quality research practices is primarily placed on authors. However, barriers to improved quality publication practices cut across all levels of the research community and require a broader approach that shares the burden for ensuring the production of high quality publications. We describe a framework that is intended to be ambitious and aspirational and encourage discussion and adoption of strategies to improve quality publication practices (QPPs). The framework cuts across multiple stakeholders and is designed to enhance (a) the quality of reporting; (b) adherence to protocols and guidelines; (c) timely accessibility of study materials and data. We discuss how QPPs might be improved by (a) funding bodies considering formally supporting QPPs; (b) research institutions encouraging a research culture that espouses quality research practices, and internally supporting QPP review processes and professional development in QPPs; (c) journals expanding editorial teams to include reviewers with design and statistical expertise, considering strategies to enhance QPP adherence during the peer review process, and committing to ongoing assessment and development of QPP training for peer reviewers; and (d) authors and peer reviewers integrating QPPs during the manuscript preparation/peer review process, engaging in ongoing QPP training, and committing to openness and transparency initiatives. We discuss the current state and potential next steps within each stage of the framework and provide information and resources to enhance QPPs. We hope that the suggestions offered here inspire research institutions, leaders and faculty to discuss, reflect on, and take action towards, integrating these, or other, QPPs into their research practice and workplace.
解决“复制危机”和有问题的研究实践是临床心理学科学国际研究议程的首要任务。本文旨在探讨如何通过特别关注出版实践来提高研究实践的质量。目前，记录研究实践质量的责任主要由作者承担。然而，提高质量出版实践的障碍跨越了研究界的各个层面，需要采取更广泛的方法，共同承担确保高质量出版物产出的责任。我们描述了一个框架，旨在具有雄心和抱负，并鼓励讨论和采用策略来提高质量出版实践（QPP）。该框架跨越了多个利益相关者，旨在提高（a）报告的质量；（b）遵守方案和准则；（c）研究材料和数据的及时可访问性。我们讨论了通过以下方式如何提高 QPP：（a）资助机构考虑正式支持 QPP；（b）研究机构鼓励倡导高质量研究实践的研究文化，并在内部支持 QPP 审查流程和 QPP 专业发展；（c）期刊扩大编辑团队，包括具有设计和统计专业知识的审稿人，考虑在同行评审过程中增强 QPP 遵守的策略，并承诺对同行评审员的 QPP 培训进行持续评估和发展；以及（d）作者和同行评审员在稿件准备/同行评审过程中整合 QPP，参与持续的 QPP 培训，并承诺开展开放性和透明度举措。我们讨论了框架每个阶段的当前状态和潜在的下一步，并提供了信息和资源，以增强 QPP。我们希望这里提出的建议能够激发研究机构、领导者和教师讨论、反思并采取行动，将这些或其他 QPP 纳入他们的研究实践和工作场所。
