Cargando…

The Use of Questionable Research Practices to Survive in Academia Examined With Expert Elicitation, Prior-Data Conflicts, Bayes Factors for Replication Effects, and the Bayes Truth Serum

The popularity and use of Bayesian methods have increased across many research domains. The current article demonstrates how some less familiar Bayesian methods can be used. Specifically, we applied expert elicitation, testing for prior-data conflicts, the Bayesian Truth Serum, and testing for repli...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: van de Schoot, Rens, Winter, Sonja D., Griffioen, Elian, Grimmelikhuijsen, Stephan, Arts, Ingrid, Veen, Duco, Grandfield, Elizabeth M., Tummers, Lars G.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8667468/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34912255
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.621547
_version_ 1784614392735727616
author van de Schoot, Rens
Winter, Sonja D.
Griffioen, Elian
Grimmelikhuijsen, Stephan
Arts, Ingrid
Veen, Duco
Grandfield, Elizabeth M.
Tummers, Lars G.
author_facet van de Schoot, Rens
Winter, Sonja D.
Griffioen, Elian
Grimmelikhuijsen, Stephan
Arts, Ingrid
Veen, Duco
Grandfield, Elizabeth M.
Tummers, Lars G.
author_sort van de Schoot, Rens
collection PubMed
description The popularity and use of Bayesian methods have increased across many research domains. The current article demonstrates how some less familiar Bayesian methods can be used. Specifically, we applied expert elicitation, testing for prior-data conflicts, the Bayesian Truth Serum, and testing for replication effects via Bayes Factors in a series of four studies investigating the use of questionable research practices (QRPs). Scientifically fraudulent or unethical research practices have caused quite a stir in academia and beyond. Improving science starts with educating Ph.D. candidates: the scholars of tomorrow. In four studies concerning 765 Ph.D. candidates, we investigate whether Ph.D. candidates can differentiate between ethical and unethical or even fraudulent research practices. We probed the Ph.D.s’ willingness to publish research from such practices and tested whether this is influenced by (un)ethical behavior pressure from supervisors or peers. Furthermore, 36 academic leaders (deans, vice-deans, and heads of research) were interviewed and asked to predict what Ph.D.s would answer for different vignettes. Our study shows, and replicates, that some Ph.D. candidates are willing to publish results deriving from even blatant fraudulent behavior–data fabrication. Additionally, some academic leaders underestimated this behavior, which is alarming. Academic leaders have to keep in mind that Ph.D. candidates can be under more pressure than they realize and might be susceptible to using QRPs. As an inspiring example and to encourage others to make their Bayesian work reproducible, we published data, annotated scripts, and detailed output on the Open Science Framework (OSF).
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8667468
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-86674682021-12-14 The Use of Questionable Research Practices to Survive in Academia Examined With Expert Elicitation, Prior-Data Conflicts, Bayes Factors for Replication Effects, and the Bayes Truth Serum van de Schoot, Rens Winter, Sonja D. Griffioen, Elian Grimmelikhuijsen, Stephan Arts, Ingrid Veen, Duco Grandfield, Elizabeth M. Tummers, Lars G. Front Psychol Psychology The popularity and use of Bayesian methods have increased across many research domains. The current article demonstrates how some less familiar Bayesian methods can be used. Specifically, we applied expert elicitation, testing for prior-data conflicts, the Bayesian Truth Serum, and testing for replication effects via Bayes Factors in a series of four studies investigating the use of questionable research practices (QRPs). Scientifically fraudulent or unethical research practices have caused quite a stir in academia and beyond. Improving science starts with educating Ph.D. candidates: the scholars of tomorrow. In four studies concerning 765 Ph.D. candidates, we investigate whether Ph.D. candidates can differentiate between ethical and unethical or even fraudulent research practices. We probed the Ph.D.s’ willingness to publish research from such practices and tested whether this is influenced by (un)ethical behavior pressure from supervisors or peers. Furthermore, 36 academic leaders (deans, vice-deans, and heads of research) were interviewed and asked to predict what Ph.D.s would answer for different vignettes. Our study shows, and replicates, that some Ph.D. candidates are willing to publish results deriving from even blatant fraudulent behavior–data fabrication. Additionally, some academic leaders underestimated this behavior, which is alarming. Academic leaders have to keep in mind that Ph.D. candidates can be under more pressure than they realize and might be susceptible to using QRPs. As an inspiring example and to encourage others to make their Bayesian work reproducible, we published data, annotated scripts, and detailed output on the Open Science Framework (OSF). Frontiers Media S.A. 2021-11-29 /pmc/articles/PMC8667468/ /pubmed/34912255 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.621547 Text en Copyright © 2021 van de Schoot, Winter, Griffioen, Grimmelikhuijsen, Arts, Veen, Grandfield and Tummers. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Psychology
van de Schoot, Rens
Winter, Sonja D.
Griffioen, Elian
Grimmelikhuijsen, Stephan
Arts, Ingrid
Veen, Duco
Grandfield, Elizabeth M.
Tummers, Lars G.
The Use of Questionable Research Practices to Survive in Academia Examined With Expert Elicitation, Prior-Data Conflicts, Bayes Factors for Replication Effects, and the Bayes Truth Serum
title The Use of Questionable Research Practices to Survive in Academia Examined With Expert Elicitation, Prior-Data Conflicts, Bayes Factors for Replication Effects, and the Bayes Truth Serum
title_full The Use of Questionable Research Practices to Survive in Academia Examined With Expert Elicitation, Prior-Data Conflicts, Bayes Factors for Replication Effects, and the Bayes Truth Serum
title_fullStr The Use of Questionable Research Practices to Survive in Academia Examined With Expert Elicitation, Prior-Data Conflicts, Bayes Factors for Replication Effects, and the Bayes Truth Serum
title_full_unstemmed The Use of Questionable Research Practices to Survive in Academia Examined With Expert Elicitation, Prior-Data Conflicts, Bayes Factors for Replication Effects, and the Bayes Truth Serum
title_short The Use of Questionable Research Practices to Survive in Academia Examined With Expert Elicitation, Prior-Data Conflicts, Bayes Factors for Replication Effects, and the Bayes Truth Serum
title_sort use of questionable research practices to survive in academia examined with expert elicitation, prior-data conflicts, bayes factors for replication effects, and the bayes truth serum
topic Psychology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8667468/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34912255
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.621547
work_keys_str_mv AT vandeschootrens theuseofquestionableresearchpracticestosurviveinacademiaexaminedwithexpertelicitationpriordataconflictsbayesfactorsforreplicationeffectsandthebayestruthserum
AT wintersonjad theuseofquestionableresearchpracticestosurviveinacademiaexaminedwithexpertelicitationpriordataconflictsbayesfactorsforreplicationeffectsandthebayestruthserum
AT griffioenelian theuseofquestionableresearchpracticestosurviveinacademiaexaminedwithexpertelicitationpriordataconflictsbayesfactorsforreplicationeffectsandthebayestruthserum
AT grimmelikhuijsenstephan theuseofquestionableresearchpracticestosurviveinacademiaexaminedwithexpertelicitationpriordataconflictsbayesfactorsforreplicationeffectsandthebayestruthserum
AT artsingrid theuseofquestionableresearchpracticestosurviveinacademiaexaminedwithexpertelicitationpriordataconflictsbayesfactorsforreplicationeffectsandthebayestruthserum
AT veenduco theuseofquestionableresearchpracticestosurviveinacademiaexaminedwithexpertelicitationpriordataconflictsbayesfactorsforreplicationeffectsandthebayestruthserum
AT grandfieldelizabethm theuseofquestionableresearchpracticestosurviveinacademiaexaminedwithexpertelicitationpriordataconflictsbayesfactorsforreplicationeffectsandthebayestruthserum
AT tummerslarsg theuseofquestionableresearchpracticestosurviveinacademiaexaminedwithexpertelicitationpriordataconflictsbayesfactorsforreplicationeffectsandthebayestruthserum
AT vandeschootrens useofquestionableresearchpracticestosurviveinacademiaexaminedwithexpertelicitationpriordataconflictsbayesfactorsforreplicationeffectsandthebayestruthserum
AT wintersonjad useofquestionableresearchpracticestosurviveinacademiaexaminedwithexpertelicitationpriordataconflictsbayesfactorsforreplicationeffectsandthebayestruthserum
AT griffioenelian useofquestionableresearchpracticestosurviveinacademiaexaminedwithexpertelicitationpriordataconflictsbayesfactorsforreplicationeffectsandthebayestruthserum
AT grimmelikhuijsenstephan useofquestionableresearchpracticestosurviveinacademiaexaminedwithexpertelicitationpriordataconflictsbayesfactorsforreplicationeffectsandthebayestruthserum
AT artsingrid useofquestionableresearchpracticestosurviveinacademiaexaminedwithexpertelicitationpriordataconflictsbayesfactorsforreplicationeffectsandthebayestruthserum
AT veenduco useofquestionableresearchpracticestosurviveinacademiaexaminedwithexpertelicitationpriordataconflictsbayesfactorsforreplicationeffectsandthebayestruthserum
AT grandfieldelizabethm useofquestionableresearchpracticestosurviveinacademiaexaminedwithexpertelicitationpriordataconflictsbayesfactorsforreplicationeffectsandthebayestruthserum
AT tummerslarsg useofquestionableresearchpracticestosurviveinacademiaexaminedwithexpertelicitationpriordataconflictsbayesfactorsforreplicationeffectsandthebayestruthserum