FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W615934970> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W615934970 startingPage "59" @default.
• W615934970 abstract "Although most undergraduates should have some access to and familiarity with the literature, the transition to graduate school generally involves a much greater focus on reading and interpreting empirical studies. Graduate student learning often includes not only the mechanics of empirical design, but also the process by which design progresses to study, and on to publication. How students understand this process, and the extent to which they ultimately view the resulting literature as relevant to their post-graduate school careers, will likely be influenced by how much they trust both the literature and the process that generates it. One aspect of the process that may ultimately influence trust in the literature is an understanding of issues relating to publication bias. In recent years, problems relating to publication bias, the selective publication of studies with a particular outcome (Ferguson & Brannick, 2012, p. 120), have received increased attention. In a sample of 91 published meta-analyses, Ferguson and Brannick (2012) concluded that the effects of publication bias were worrisome in about 25%, and pointed to a bias in selecting unpublished studies as one major contributing factor. Kepes, Banks, and Oh (2014) re-analyzed data from four published meta-analyses and found that three of the four showed some potential influence of publication bias, calling into question their results. It should not be surprising that publication bias has been of particular interest in meta-analytic circles, given its explicit consideration of issues relating to Rosenthal's (1979) file drawer problem, which emphasizes the effect unpublished studies may have on meta-analytic results. Attempts to address publication bias are on-going. Begg (1994), in a chapter in The Handbook of Research Synthesis, outlined methods for both identifying and correcting for publication bias. In 2009, Sutton updated and expanded Begg's (1994) treatment of the topic. Even more recently, Francis (2012) argued that application of Bayesian analysis may help to reduce such bias. Methods for identifying and correcting the issue may be evolving, but the problem remains. Publication bias has been attributed both to the actions of authors and editors (Greenwald, 1975). On the authorial side, Franco, Malhotra, and Simonovits (2014) reviewed a sample of 221 studies from the National Science Foundation's TESS (Time-sharing Experiments in the Social Sciences) program. All studies were peer-reviewed prior to being conducted, so Franco et al. noted that it was reasonable to assume that their designs were of relatively high-quality. Although around 50% of the 221 studies were eventually published, only around 20% of those with null results were published. This was not simply a matter, as might be assumed, of journals rejecting studies with null findings. The vast majority of the studies with null results--65%--were never written up by the researchers at all. From the perspective of journal and editorial publication practices, distinct issues have been identified. Fanelli (2010) demonstrated that the percentage of published studies in the social and behavioral sciences with supported hypotheses is much higher than in the physical or biological sciences. This is consistent with the arguments of Kepes and McDaniel (2013), who note that the percentage of studies in psychology that support their hypotheses is so high that, we are either approaching omniscience or our journals are publishing an unrepresentative sample of completed research (p. 252). Both Fanelli (2010) and Kepes and McDaniel (2013) highlight the reticence of journals, particularly in psychology, to publish null results. Ferguson and Heene (2012) go on to point out that failing to publish null results undermines one of the core principles of science: replicability. If null results are unlikely to be published, then failed replications are unlikely to be published, and psychology will be unable to correct Type I errors that make their way into the literature. …" @default.
• W615934970 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W615934970 creator A5004897657 @default.
• W615934970 creator A5011621446 @default.
• W615934970 creator A5060627841 @default.
• W615934970 date "2015-03-01" @default.
• W615934970 modified "2023-09-24" @default.
• W615934970 title "A Question of Trust: Publication Bias and Student Views of Psychological Literature" @default.
• W615934970 hasPublicationYear "2015" @default.
• W615934970 type Work @default.
• W615934970 sameAs 615934970 @default.
• W615934970 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W615934970 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W615934970 hasAuthorship W615934970A5004897657 @default.
• W615934970 hasAuthorship W615934970A5011621446 @default.
• W615934970 hasAuthorship W615934970A5060627841 @default.
• W615934970 hasConcept C105795698 @default.
• W615934970 hasConcept C111472728 @default.
• W615934970 hasConcept C120936955 @default.
• W615934970 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W615934970 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W615934970 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W615934970 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W615934970 hasConcept C185592680 @default.
• W615934970 hasConcept C189708586 @default.
• W615934970 hasConcept C198531522 @default.
• W615934970 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W615934970 hasConcept C2779473830 @default.
• W615934970 hasConcept C2780439572 @default.
• W615934970 hasConcept C33923547 @default.
• W615934970 hasConcept C40423286 @default.
• W615934970 hasConcept C43617362 @default.
• W615934970 hasConcept C554936623 @default.
• W615934970 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W615934970 hasConcept C77805123 @default.
• W615934970 hasConcept C95190672 @default.
• W615934970 hasConceptScore W615934970C105795698 @default.
• W615934970 hasConceptScore W615934970C111472728 @default.
• W615934970 hasConceptScore W615934970C120936955 @default.
• W615934970 hasConceptScore W615934970C126322002 @default.
• W615934970 hasConceptScore W615934970C138885662 @default.
• W615934970 hasConceptScore W615934970C15744967 @default.
• W615934970 hasConceptScore W615934970C17744445 @default.
• W615934970 hasConceptScore W615934970C185592680 @default.
• W615934970 hasConceptScore W615934970C189708586 @default.
• W615934970 hasConceptScore W615934970C198531522 @default.
• W615934970 hasConceptScore W615934970C199539241 @default.
• W615934970 hasConceptScore W615934970C2779473830 @default.
• W615934970 hasConceptScore W615934970C2780439572 @default.
• W615934970 hasConceptScore W615934970C33923547 @default.
• W615934970 hasConceptScore W615934970C40423286 @default.
• W615934970 hasConceptScore W615934970C43617362 @default.
• W615934970 hasConceptScore W615934970C554936623 @default.
• W615934970 hasConceptScore W615934970C71924100 @default.
• W615934970 hasConceptScore W615934970C77805123 @default.
• W615934970 hasConceptScore W615934970C95190672 @default.
• W615934970 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W615934970 hasLocation W6159349701 @default.
• W615934970 hasOpenAccess W615934970 @default.
• W615934970 hasPrimaryLocation W6159349701 @default.
• W615934970 hasRelatedWork W1535272433 @default.
• W615934970 hasRelatedWork W1973809822 @default.
• W615934970 hasRelatedWork W1978137990 @default.
• W615934970 hasRelatedWork W1982768517 @default.
• W615934970 hasRelatedWork W1995513484 @default.
• W615934970 hasRelatedWork W1996633382 @default.
• W615934970 hasRelatedWork W2003545652 @default.
• W615934970 hasRelatedWork W2023172431 @default.
• W615934970 hasRelatedWork W2029793306 @default.
• W615934970 hasRelatedWork W2065896259 @default.
• W615934970 hasRelatedWork W2074454231 @default.
• W615934970 hasRelatedWork W2090822039 @default.
• W615934970 hasRelatedWork W2106032541 @default.
• W615934970 hasRelatedWork W2150461564 @default.
• W615934970 hasRelatedWork W2154967499 @default.
• W615934970 hasRelatedWork W2182521985 @default.
• W615934970 hasRelatedWork W2185447675 @default.
• W615934970 hasRelatedWork W2256903694 @default.
• W615934970 hasRelatedWork W3124463323 @default.
• W615934970 hasRelatedWork W34302804 @default.
• W615934970 hasVolume "17" @default.
• W615934970 isParatext "false" @default.
• W615934970 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W615934970 magId "615934970" @default.
• W615934970 workType "article" @default.