The replication crisis as mere indicator of two fundamental misalignments: Methodological confirmation bias in hypothesis testing and anthropological oversimplification in theory-building

Julia Schnepf*, Norbert Groeben

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Psychological research is currently in a phase of transition. The replication crisis has led to the introduction of a number of corrective measures such as preregistration, registered reports, open data and methods in order to make scientific knowledge in psychological science more reliable. In this article, we discuss why these tools remain superficial and provide rather a symptom treatment than a deeper treatment of the causes of the replication crisis. To this end, we address two central misalignments of current psychological research: Confirmation bias, in the sense of overweighting significant, hypothesis-confirming findings over negative ones, and the anthropological oversimplification of the human research subject. We conclude by providing indications of how a paradigm shift in psychological science research and publication practices can help to combat the causes of the replication crisis and poor scientific research practices.
Original languageEnglish
Article number101110
Number of pages8
JournalNew Ideas in Psychology
Volume75
Early online date1 Aug 2024
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Dec 2024

Keywords

  • Hypothesis testing
  • Replication crisis
  • Questionable research practices
  • Confirmation bias
  • Confirmatory research
  • COLLECTION

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The replication crisis as mere indicator of two fundamental misalignments: Methodological confirmation bias in hypothesis testing and anthropological oversimplification in theory-building'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this