Corruption and hierarchy: a replication of studies 1c and 6 of Fath & Kay 2018.

Corruption represents a complex problem firmly embedded within our societal structures, governments, and organizations. The current study aimed to build a clearer consensus on the extent to which perceptions of organizational corruption are associated with organizational hierarchy. Two high-powered close replications of studies 1c and 6 by Fath and Kay provide further evidence for the claim that taller organizational structures are associated with greater perceived potential for corruption, and that these perceptions may compromise subsequent trust-related outcomes. Our results reinforce the importance of organizational design and aim to inspire future works to consider the ways in which researchers and organizations can minimize corruption. Preregistration, data and materials can be found on the OSF: https://osf.io/zb5j2.

A guide for social science journal editors on easing into open science.

Journal editors have a large amount of power to advance open science in their respective fields by incentivising and mandating open policies and practices at their journals. The Data PASS Journal Editors Discussion Interface (JEDI, an online community for social science journal editors: www.dpjedi.org ) has collated several resources on embedding open science in journal editing ( www.dpjedi.org/resources ). However, it can be overwhelming as an editor new to open science practices to know where to start. For this reason, we created a guide for journal editors on how to get started with open science. The guide outlines steps that editors can take to implement open policies and practices within their journal, and goes through the what, why, how, and worries of each policy and practice. This manuscript introduces and summarizes the guide (full guide: https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/hstcx ).

Correction to: 'Raising the value of research studies in psychological science by increasing the credibility of research reports: The Transparent Psi Project' (2023) by Kekecs et al.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1098/rsos.191375.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2022.2500.].

Ethical climate in healthcare: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Ethical climate refers to the shared perception of ethical norms and sets the scope for what is ethical and acceptable behaviour within teams. AIM: This paper sought to explore perceptions of ethical climate amongst healthcare workers as measured by the Ethical Climate Questionnaire (ECQ), the Hospital Ethical Climate Survey (HECS) and the Ethics Environment Questionnaire (EEQ). METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was utilised. PSYCINFO, CINAHL, WEB OF SCIENCE, MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched, and papers were included if they sampled healthcare workers and used the ECQ, HECS or EEQ. ETHICAL CONSIDERATION: Ethical approval was not required. RESULTS: The search returned 1020 results. After screening, 61 papers were included (n = 43 HECS, n = 15 ECQ, n = 3 EEQ). The overall sample size was over 17,000. The pooled mean score for the HECS was 3.60. Mean scores of individual studies ranged from 2.97 to 4.5. For the HECS studies, meta-regression was carried out. No relationship was found between the country of the studies, the study setting (ICU v non-ICU settings) or the mean years of experience that the sample had. For the ECQ, sub-scales had mean scores ranging from 3.41 (instrumental) to 4.34 (law) and were all observed to have significant and substantial heterogeneity. Three studies utilised the EEQ so further analysis was not carried out. CONCLUSIONS: The above results provide insight into the variability of scores as measured by the HECS, ECQ and EEQ. To some extent, this variability is not surprising with studies carried out across 21 countries and in a range of healthcare systems. Results also suggest that it may be that more local and context specific factors are more important when it comes to predicting ethical climate.

Teaching open and reproducible scholarship: a critical review of the evidence base for current pedagogical methods and their outcomes.

In recent years, the scientific community has called for improvements in the credibility, robustness and reproducibility of research, characterized by increased interest and promotion of open and transparent research practices. While progress has been positive, there is a lack of consideration about how this approach can be embedded into undergraduate and postgraduate research training. Specifically, a critical overview of the literature which investigates how integrating open and reproducible science may influence student outcomes is needed. In this paper, we provide the first critical review of literature surrounding the integration of open and reproducible scholarship into teaching and learning and its associated outcomes in students. Our review highlighted how embedding open and reproducible scholarship appears to be associated with (i) students' scientific literacies (i.e. students' understanding of open research, consumption of science and the development of transferable skills); (ii) student engagement (i.e. motivation and engagement with learning, collaboration and engagement in open research) and (iii) students' attitudes towards science (i.e. trust in science and confidence in research findings). However, our review also identified a need for more robust and rigorous methods within pedagogical research, including more interventional and experimental evaluations of teaching practice. We discuss implications for teaching and learning scholarship.

A systematic scoping review on the evidence behind debriefing practices for the wellbeing/emotional outcomes of healthcare workers.

Introduction: Debriefings give healthcare workers voice through the opportunity to discuss unanticipated or difficult events and recommend changes. The typical goal of routine debriefings has been to improve clinical outcomes by learning through discussion and reflection of events and then transferring that learning into clinical practice. However, little research has investigated the effects of debriefings on the emotional experiences and well-being of healthcare workers. There is some evidence that debriefings are a multi-faceted and cost-effective intervention for minimising negative health outcomes, but their use is inconsistent and they are infrequently adopted with the specific intention of giving healthcare workers a voice. The purpose of this systematic scoping review is therefore to assess the scope of existing evidence on debriefing practices for the well-being and emotional outcomes of healthcare workers. Methods: Following screening, 184 papers were synthesised through keyword mapping and exploratory trend identification. Results: The body of evidence reviewed were clustered geographically, but diverse on many other criteria of interest including the types of evidence produced, debriefing models and practices, and outcomes captured. Discussion: The current review provides a clear map of our existing understanding and highlights the need for more systematic, collaborative and rigorous bodies of evidence to determine the potential of debriefing to support the emotional outcomes of those working within healthcare. Systematic Review Registration: https://osf.io/za6rj.

Raising the value of research studies in psychological science by increasing the credibility of research reports: the transparent Psi project.

The low reproducibility rate in social sciences has produced hesitation among researchers in accepting published findings at their face value. Despite the advent of initiatives to increase transparency in research reporting, the field is still lacking tools to verify the credibility of research reports. In the present paper, we describe methodologies that let researchers craft highly credible research and allow their peers to verify this credibility. We demonstrate the application of these methods in a multi-laboratory replication of Bem's Experiment 1 (Bem 2011 J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 100, 407-425. (doi:10.1037/a0021524)) on extrasensory perception (ESP), which was co-designed by a consensus panel including both proponents and opponents of Bem's original hypothesis. In the study we applied direct data deposition in combination with born-open data and real-time research reports to extend transparency to protocol delivery and data collection. We also used piloting, checklists, laboratory logs and video-documented trial sessions to ascertain as-intended protocol delivery, and external research auditors to monitor research integrity. We found 49.89% successful guesses, while Bem reported 53.07% success rate, with the chance level being 50%. Thus, Bem's findings were not replicated in our study. In the paper, we discuss the implementation, feasibility and perceived usefulness of the credibility-enhancing methodologies used throughout the project.

A last resort? A scoping review of patient and healthcare worker attitudes toward strike action.

While strike action has been common since the industrial revolution, it often invokes a passionate and polarising response, from the strikers themselves, from employers, governments and the general public. Support or lack thereof from health workers and the general public is an important consideration in the justification of strike action. This systematic review sought to examine the impact of strike action on patient and clinician attitudes, specifically to explore (1) patient and health worker support for strike action and (2) the predictors for supporting strike action and the reasons given for engaging in strike action. A systematic scoping review was employed to identify all relevant literature, followed by a textual narrative synthesis. A total of 34 studies met inclusion criteria. Support for strike action was largely context-dependent. A range of factors impact support for strike action; broader cultural and structural factors, such as unionisation and general acceptance of strike action; systemic factors, such as the nature of the healthcare system, including infrastructure and work conditions; the strike itself and a range of individual factors, the most notable of which was being a student or in an early career stage. There were also some surprising results, for example, during doctors strike, nurses were provided with the opportunity to expand their role, which led to greater professional autonomy and job satisfaction.

Improving evidence-based practice through preregistration of applied research: Barriers and recommendations.

Preregistration is the practice of publicly publishing plans on central components of the research process before access to, or collection, of data. Within the context of the replication crisis, open science practices like preregistration have been pivotal in facilitating greater transparency in research. However, such practices have been applied nearly exclusively to basic academic research, with rare consideration of the relevance to applied and consultancy-based research. This is particularly problematic as such research is typically reported with very low levels of transparency and accountability despite being disseminated as influential gray literature to inform practice. Evidence-based practice is best served by an appreciation of multiple sources of quality evidence, thus the current review considers the potential of preregistration to improve both the accessibility and credibility of applied research toward more rigorous evidence-based practice. The current three-part review outlines, first, the opportunities of preregistration for applied research, and second, three barriers - practical challenges, stakeholder roles, and the suitability of preregistration. Last, this review makes four recommendations to overcome these barriers and maximize the opportunities of preregistration for academics, industry, and the structures they are held within - changes to preregistration templates, new types of templates, education and training, and recognition and structural changes.

Causal and Associational Language in Observational Health Research: A Systematic Evaluation.

We estimated the degree to which language used in the high-profile medical/public health/epidemiology literature implied causality using language linking exposures to outcomes and action recommendations; examined disconnects between language and recommendations; identified the most common linking phrases; and estimated how strongly linking phrases imply causality. We searched for and screened 1,170 articles from 18 high-profile journals (65 per journal) published from 2010-2019. Based on written framing and systematic guidance, 3 reviewers rated the degree of causality implied in abstracts and full text for exposure/outcome linking language and action recommendations. Reviewers rated the causal implication of exposure/outcome linking language as none (no causal implication) in 13.8%, weak in 34.2%, moderate in 33.2%, and strong in 18.7% of abstracts. The implied causality of action recommendations was higher than the implied causality of linking sentences for 44.5% or commensurate for 40.3% of articles. The most common linking word in abstracts was "associate" (45.7%). Reviewers' ratings of linking word roots were highly heterogeneous; over half of reviewers rated "association" as having at least some causal implication. This research undercuts the assumption that avoiding "causal" words leads to clarity of interpretation in medical research.

A network of change: united action on research integrity.

The last decade has seen renewed concern within the scientific community over the reproducibility and transparency of research findings. This paper outlines some of the various responsibilities of stakeholders in addressing the systemic issues that contribute to this concern. In particular, this paper asserts that a united, joined-up approach is needed, in which all stakeholders, including researchers, universities, funders, publishers, and governments, work together to set standards of research integrity and engender scientific progress and innovation. Using two developments as examples: the adoption of Registered Reports as a discrete initiative, and the use of open data as an ongoing norm change, we discuss the importance of collaboration across stakeholders.

Towards a culture of open scholarship: the role of pedagogical communities.

The UK House of Commons Science and Technology Committee has called for evidence on the roles that different stakeholders play in reproducibility and research integrity. Of central priority are proposals for improving research integrity and quality, as well as guidance and support for researchers. In response to this, we argue that there is one important component of research integrity that is often absent from discussion: the pedagogical consequences of how we teach, mentor, and supervise students through open scholarship. We justify the need to integrate open scholarship principles into research training within higher education and argue that pedagogical communities play a key role in fostering an inclusive culture of open scholarship. We illustrate these benefits by presenting the Framework for Open and Reproducible Research Training (FORRT), an international grassroots community whose goal is to provide support, resources, visibility, and advocacy for the adoption of principled, open teaching and mentoring practices, whilst generating conversations about the ethics and social impact of higher-education pedagogy. Representing a diverse group of early-career researchers and students across specialisms, we advocate for greater recognition of and support for pedagogical communities, and encourage all research stakeholders to engage with these communities to enable long-term, sustainable change.

Burnout across boundaries: Can parental burnout directly or indirectly influence work outcomes?

Burnout, while historically considered a work-related condition, can be associated with parenting where it can have direct impacts upon parental outcomes and one's personal resources such as mental health. However, little is known about the domain-incongruent effects of burnout and thus whether parental burnout can manifest within the workplace. The current study uses longitudinal data collected from 499 parents over three intervals across an 8-month period to explore two possible mechanisms. Firstly, a direct relationship is explored by considering whether parental burnout provides incremental validity above job burnout in the prediction of three work outcomes: job satisfaction, turnover intentions, and counterproductive work behaviors. Secondly, it is explored whether depression mediates the relationship between parental burnout and work outcomes. Findings suggest parental burnout may have limited impacts upon work outcomes, providing the impetus for a new direction of research to better understand whether or how burnout in one domain of life can influence the outcomes in other life domains. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12144-021-02687-3.

Is there evidence for cross-domain congruency sequence effect? A replication of Kan et al. (2013).

Exploring the mechanisms of cognitive control is central to understanding how we control our behaviour. These mechanisms can be studied in conflict paradigms, which require the inhibition of irrelevant responses to perform the task. It has been suggested that in these tasks, the detection of conflict enhances cognitive control resulting in improved conflict resolution of subsequent trials. If this is the case, then this so-called congruency sequence effect can be expected to occur in cross-domain tasks. Previous research on the domain-generality of the effect presented inconsistent results. In this study, we provide a multi-site replication of three previous experiments of Kan et al. (Kan IP, Teubner-Rhodes S, Drummey AB, Nutile L, Krupa L, Novick JM 2013 Cognition 129, 637-651) which test congruency sequence effect between very different domains: from a syntactic to a non-syntactic domain (Experiment 1), and from a perceptual to a verbal domain (Experiments 2 and 3). Despite all our efforts, we found only partial support for the claims of the original study. With a single exception, we could not replicate the original findings; the data remained inconclusive or went against the theoretical hypothesis. We discuss the compatibility of the results with alternative theoretical frameworks.

A conceptual replication of emotional intelligence as a second-stratum factor of intelligence.

MacCann, Joseph, Newman, and Roberts (2014) explored various unidimensional, oblique, hierarchical and bifactor models to suggest that ability EI can represent a distinct set of cognitive abilities that can be placed within existing intelligence frameworks. The current study presents a conceptual replication of these analyses from data collected using alternative (nonproprietary) measures. Using a data set of 830 individuals, the current study provides further evidence to suggest ability EI best represents a hierarchical construct formed of emotion perception, understanding and management factors, structured as a second stratum factor within broader models of cognitive ability. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Putting 'Emotional Intelligences' in Their Place: Introducing the Integrated Model of Affect-Related Individual Differences.

Numerous individual differences, models, and measures have been associated with the 'emotional intelligence' (EI) label. This paper discusses one of the most pervasive problems regarding EI-related individual differences, namely, the lack of a meaningful theoretical framework. First, drawing upon existing theoretical frameworks, we argue that EI-related characteristics can be considered constituents of existing models of cognitive ability (ability EI), personality (trait EI), and emotion regulation (EI competencies). Second, having differentiated between these perspectives (ability, personality, and emotion regulation), we draw upon existing theory and research to build the Integrated Model of Affect-related Individual Differences (IMAID), which provides an initial mechanistic representation that explains how the different EI-related constructs are likely to interrelate and coalesce to influence affective outcomes. In essence, the IMAID is an integrated mediation model in which emotion regulation mediates the effects of ability EI and affect-related personality traits upon outcomes. Viewing EI-related constructs as interrelated extensions of well-established individual difference frameworks clarifies some pervasive misconceptions regarding EI-related characteristics and provides scholars and practitioners with a clear and useful theoretical framework ripe for exploration. We conclude by using the IMAID to suggest a theoretically driven agenda for future research.

The Psychological Science Accelerator: Advancing Psychology through a Distributed Collaborative Network.

Concerns have been growing about the veracity of psychological research. Many findings in psychological science are based on studies with insufficient statistical power and nonrepresentative samples, or may otherwise be limited to specific, ungeneralizable settings or populations. Crowdsourced research, a type of large-scale collaboration in which one or more research projects are conducted across multiple lab sites, offers a pragmatic solution to these and other current methodological challenges. The Psychological Science Accelerator (PSA) is a distributed network of laboratories designed to enable and support crowdsourced research projects. These projects can focus on novel research questions, or attempt to replicate prior research, in large, diverse samples. The PSA's mission is to accelerate the accumulation of reliable and generalizable evidence in psychological science. Here, we describe the background, structure, principles, procedures, benefits, and challenges of the PSA. In contrast to other crowdsourced research networks, the PSA is ongoing (as opposed to time-limited), efficient (in terms of re-using structures and principles for different projects), decentralized, diverse (in terms of participants and researchers), and inclusive (of proposals, contributions, and other relevant input from anyone inside or outside of the network). The PSA and other approaches to crowdsourced psychological science will advance our understanding of mental processes and behaviors by enabling rigorous research and systematically examining its generalizability.