Are Psychology Journals Anti-replication? A Snapshot of Editorial Practices

Article English OPEN
Martin, G. N. ; Clarke, Richard M. (2017)
  • Publisher: Frontiers Media S.A.
  • Journal: Frontiers in Psychology, volume 8 (issn: 1664-1078, eissn: 1664-1078)
  • Related identifiers: pmc: PMC5387793, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00523
  • Subject: replication | publication bias | psychology | journal editorial practices | Original Research | p-hacking

Recent research in psychology has highlighted a number of replication problems in the discipline, with publication bias – the preference for publishing original and positive results, and a resistance to publishing negative results and replications- identified as one reason for replication failure. However, little empirical research exists to demonstrate that journals explicitly refuse to publish replications. We reviewed the instructions to authors and the published aims of 1151 psychology journals and examined whether they indicated that replications were permitted and accepted. We also examined whether journal practices differed across branches of the discipline, and whether editorial practices differed between low and high impact journals. Thirty three journals (3%) stated in their aims or instructions to authors that they accepted replications. There was no difference between high and low impact journals. The implications of these findings for psychology are discussed.
Share - Bookmark