ArticlePloS one2017
The influence of journal submission guidelines on authors' reporting of statistics and use of open research practices.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
31 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The influence of journal submission guidelines on authors' reporting of statistics and use of open research practices: Five years later.Behavior research methods · 2023Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Dyslexia treatment studies: A systematic review and suggestions on testing treatment efficacy with small effects and small samples.Behavior research methods · 2021Pooled it
- Evaluating the Reporting Quality of Researcher-Developed Alphabet Knowledge Measures: How Transparent and Replicable Is It?Frontiers in psychology · 2021Pooled it
- Self-reported availability of research data in American Psychological Association journal articles: a cross-sectional investigation.Research integrity and peer review · 2026Article
- Open science interventions to improve reproducibility and replicability of research: a scoping review.Royal Society open science · 2025Article
- Nonsignificance misinterpreted as an effect's absence in psychology: prevalence and temporal analyses.Royal Society open science · 2025Article
- Investigation of research quality and transparency in neurosurgery through the utilization of open science practices.Neurosurgical review · 2024Article
- Investigating the nature of open science practices across complementary, alternative, and integrative medicine journals: An audit.PloS one · 2024Article
- Article
- Two replications of Raymond, Shapiro, and Arnell (1992), The Attentional Blink.Behavior research methods · 2021Article
- Article
- Does open data boost journal impact: evidence from Chinese economics.Scientometrics · 2021Article
- Article
- Research transparency promotion by surgical journals publishing randomised controlled trials: a survey.Trials · 2020Article
- The ARRIVE guidelines 2.0: Updated guidelines for reporting animal research.Experimental physiology · 2020Article
- The ARRIVE guidelines 2.0: Updated guidelines for reporting animal research.Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism · 2020Article
- The ARRIVE guidelines 2.0: updated guidelines for reporting animal research.The Journal of physiology · 2020Article
- The ARRIVE guidelines 2.0: Updated guidelines for reporting animal research.British journal of pharmacology · 2020Article
- The ARRIVE guidelines 2.0: updated guidelines for reporting animal research.BMJ open science · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
From January 2014, Psychological Science introduced new submission guidelines that encouraged the use of effect sizes, estimation, and meta-analysis (the "new statistics"), required extra detail of methods, and offered badges for use of open science practices. We investigated the use of these practices in empirical articles published by Psychological Science and, for comparison, by the Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, during the period of January 2013 to December 2015. The use of null hypothesis significance testing (NHST) was extremely high at all times and in both journals. In Psychological Science, the use of confidence intervals increased markedly overall, from 28% of articles in 2013 to 70% in 2015, as did the availability of open data (3 to 39%) and open materials (7 to 31%). The other journal showed smaller or much smaller changes. Our findings suggest that journal-specific submission guidelines may encourage desirable changes in authors' practices.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.