Advancing the Social Sciences: Addressing Challenges and Enhancing Research Integrity
Ph.D. -course
- ECTS credits
- 3
- Teaching semesters
- Spring
- Course code
- GHIG944
- Number of semesters
- 1
- Teaching language
- English
- Resources
- Schedule
Course description
Objectives and Content
General content
In this course, students will learn about threats to rigor and validity in psychological science, such as research fraud, p-hacking, HARKing, allegiance bias, and publication bias, and explore strategies to strengthen research integrity. Although this debate is mainly conducted in the field of psychology, the topics discussed are relevant to other social sciences as well.
Type of course
Methods
General learning objectives
Students should learn how to advance the social sciences by learning how to ensure rigor and validity in their research.
Learning Outcomes
Knowledge
After completion of the course, the candidate has:
- insight into the history, causes, and implications of the replication crisis in psychology and the social sciences as well as possible solutions
- advanced knowledge about research misconduct and questionable research practices
Skills
By the end of this course, students is able to:
- craft preregistration plans that enhance the transparency and replicability of the research process
- argue for the importance of a culture of transparency and integrity within research
General competence
By the end of this course, students is able to:
- reflect on personal, collective, and societal responsibilities in addressing the challenges facing psychology and the social sciences
ECTS Credits
Level of Study
Semester of Instruction
Place of Instruction
Required Previous Knowledge
Teaching Methods and Extent of Organized Teaching
Lectures and seminars/exercises
4 days of teaching (5-6 hours each)
Compulsory Assignments and Attendance
Presentation (individually or in groups).
80% attendance is required.
Forms of Assessment
Approval of the presentation and the pre-registration is a requirement for an approved course.
The pre-registration has to be submitted by May 15.
Grading Scale
Assessment Semester
Reading List
As the course will be dealing with current developments/debates and is open to changes depending on student interest, the literature list is not complete.
Core literature:
Nelson, L. D., Simmons, J., & Simonsohn, U. (2018). Psychology's renaissance. Annual review of psychology, 69, 511-534.
Open Science Collaboration. (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349(6251), aac4716.
Brandt, M. J., IJzerman, H., Dijksterhuis, A., Farach, F. J., Geller, J., Giner-Sorolla, R., ... & Van't Veer, A. (2014). The replication recipe: What makes for a convincing replication? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 50, 217-224.
Xie, Y., Wang, K., & Kong, Y. (2021). Prevalence of research misconduct and questionable research practices: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Science and Engineering Ethics, 27(4), 41.
Additional literature:
Corneille, O., Havemann, J., Henderson, E. L., IJzerman, H., Hussey, I., Orban de Xivry, J. J., ... & Lotter, L. D. (2023). Beware `persuasive communication devices¿ when writing and reading scientific articles. ELife, 12, e88654.
Fanelli, D., Costas, R., Fang, F. C., Casadevall, A., & Bik, E. M. (2019). Testing hypotheses on risk factors for scientific misconduct via matched-control analysis of papers containing problematic image duplications. Science and engineering ethics, 25, 771-789.
Honeycutt, N., & Jussim, L. (2023). Political bias in the social sciences: A critical, theoretical, and empirical review. Ideological and Political Bias in Psychology: Nature, Scope, and Solutions, 97-146.
Ioannidis, J. P. (2005). Why most published research findings are false. PLoS medicine, 2(8), e124.
Kühberger, A., Streit, D., & Scherndl, T. (2022). Self-correction in science: The effect of retraction on the frequency of citations. Plos one, 17(12), e0277814.
Levelt, W. J., Drenth, P. J. D., & Noort, E. (2012). Flawed science: The fraudulent research practices of social psychologist Diederik Stapel.
Munder, T., Brütsch, O., Leonhart, R., Gerger, H., & Barth, J. (2013). Researcher allegiance in psychotherapy outcome research: an overview of reviews. Clinical psychology review, 33(4), 501-511.
Muradchanian, J., Hoekstra, R., Kiers, H., & van Ravenzwaaij, D. (2023). The role of results in deciding to publish: A direct comparison across authors, reviewers, and editors based on an online survey. Plos one, 18(10), e0292279.
Ritchie, S. (2020). Science fictions: Exposing fraud, bias, negligence and hype in science. Random House.
Simonsohn, U., Nelson, L. D., & Simmons, J. P. (2014). P-curve: a key to the file-drawer. Journal of experimental psychology: General, 143(2), 534.
Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., & Simonsohn, U. (2011). False-positive psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant. Psychological Science, 22(11), 1359-1366.
Simonsohn, U. (2013). Just post it: The lesson from two cases of fabricated data detected by statistics alone. Psychological Science, 24(10), 1875-1888.
Scheel, A. M., Schijen, M. R., & Lakens, D. (2021). An excess of positive results: Comparing the standard psychology literature with registered reports. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 4(2), 25152459211007467.
Spitzer, L., & Mueller, S. (2023). Registered report: Survey on attitudes and experiences regarding preregistration in psychological research. Plos one, 18(3), e0281086.
Course Evaluation
Programme Committee
Course Coordinator
Course registration and deadlines
The deadline for signing up is the 25th of march. Students may sign up though Studentweb, while external students may sign up via email.
Registration is considered to be binding. If you cannot participate, please let us know before the deadline.
Who may participate
Programme
Lectures on April 8th-9th and May 6th-7th.
April 8th: Tarlebø, 9:15-14:00
April 9th: Borgaskaret, 9:15-15:00
May 6th: Tarlebø, 9:15-15:00
May 7th: Borgaskaret, 9:15-15:00