Abstract
Problematisation: In recent years, psychology has been going through a crisis of sorts. Research methods and practices have come under increased scrutiny, with many issues identified as negatively contributing to low replicability and reproducibility of psychological research.Implications: As a consequence, researchers are increasingly called upon to overhaul and improve their research process. Various stakeholders within the scientific community are arguing for more openness and rigor within industrial and organisational (I-O) psychological research. A lack of transparency and openness further fuels criticisms as to the credibility and trustworthiness of I-O psychology which negatively affects the evidence-based practices which it supports. Furthermore, traditional gate-keepers such as grant agencies, professional societies and journals, are adapting their policies, reflecting an effort to curtail these trends.Purpose: The purpose of this opinion paper is, therefore, to stimulate an open dialogue with the South African Journal of Industrial Psychology (SAJIP) contributing authors, its editorial board and readership about the challenges associated with the replication crisis in psychology. Furthermore, it attempts to discuss how the identified issues affect I-O psychology and how these could be managed through open science practices and other structural improvements within the SAJIP.Recommendations: We enumerate several easily implementable open science practices, methodological improvements and editorial policy enhancements to enhance credibility and transparency within the SAJIP. Relying on these, we recommend changes to the current practices that can be taken up by researchers and the SAJIP to improve reproducibility and replicability in I-O psychological science.
Highlights
In recent years, psychology has been facing challenges to its scientific integrity
In the past 5 years, we have seen a significant increase in critiques of the research practices which industrial and organisational (I-O) psychological researchers employ, as well as critiques of the validity and trustworthiness of I-O psychological research (Banks & O’Boyle, 2013; Banks et al, 2016a, 2016b; Bosco, Aguinis, Field, Pierce, & Dalton, 2016; Grand et al, 2018; O’Boyle, Banks, & Gonzalez-Mule, 2017)
It is important to empower authors with practical guidelines on how to manage the replication crisis through open science initiatives, the South African Journal of Industrial Psychology (SAJIP) can play a vital role in dealing with these issues as a custodian of I-O psychology within South Africa
Summary
Psychology has been facing challenges to its scientific integrity. These have ranged from low replicability, methodological flaws and misapplied statistical practices (Camerer et al, 2018; Simmons, Nelson, & Simonsohn, 2011). Justifying one’s sample size and performing a power analysis to come at this number is arguably one of the easiest changes that can be implemented Another fundamental issue is the reporting of only significant effects because of publication bias – the phenomenon where statistically significant (rather than non-significant) findings have a higher probability of being published (Kepes & McDaniel, 2013). From a systematic review of articles published within the domain of I-O psychology, Banks et al (2016a) found that 91% of papers in their sample were guilty of a number of questionable research practices. It is important to empower authors with practical guidelines on how to manage the replication crisis through open science initiatives, the SAJIP can play a vital role in dealing with these issues as a custodian of I-O psychology within South Africa. Materials must be posted to a trusted repository, and reported analyses will be reproduced independently prior to publication
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call