| Title |
Playing with Data—Or How to Discourage Questionable Research Practices and Stimulate Researchers to Do Things Right
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Psychometrika, March 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11336-015-9446-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Klaas Sijtsma |
| Abstract |
Recent fraud cases in psychological and medical research have emphasized the need to pay attention to Questionable Research Practices (QRPs). Deliberate or not, QRPs usually have a deteriorating effect on the quality and the credibility of research results. QRPs must be revealed but prevention of QRPs is more important than detection. I suggest two policy measures that I expect to be effective in improving the quality of psychological research. First, the research data and the research materials should be made publicly available so as to allow verification. Second, researchers should more readily consider consulting a methodologist or a statistician. These two measures are simple but run against common practice to keep data to oneself and overestimate one's methodological and statistical skills, thus allowing secrecy and errors to enter research practice. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 46 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 11 | 24% |
| United Kingdom | 5 | 11% |
| Canada | 5 | 11% |
| China | 1 | 2% |
| Australia | 1 | 2% |
| Japan | 1 | 2% |
| Sweden | 1 | 2% |
| India | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 20 | 43% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 25 | 54% |
| Members of the public | 19 | 41% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 353 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 2 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Chile | 1 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Macao | 1 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 344 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 110 | 31% |
| Student > Master | 39 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 28 | 8% |
| Researcher | 27 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 21 | 6% |
| Other | 68 | 19% |
| Unknown | 60 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Business, Management and Accounting | 78 | 22% |
| Psychology | 67 | 19% |
| Social Sciences | 47 | 13% |
| Computer Science | 18 | 5% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 12 | 3% |
| Other | 54 | 15% |
| Unknown | 77 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 July 2023.
All research outputs
#1,422,068
of 25,418,993 outputs
Outputs from Psychometrika
#15
of 527 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,892
of 278,415 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Psychometrika
#2
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,418,993 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 527 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 278,415 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.