ReviewCommunications psychology2025
Ten principles for reliable, efficient, and adaptable coding in psychology and cognitive neuroscience.
Review in Communications psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Ten simple rules for building a collaborative coding culture.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Writing code is becoming essential for psychology and neuroscience research, supporting increasingly advanced experimental designs, processing of ever-larger datasets and easy reproduction of scientific results. Despite its critical role, coding remains challenging for many researchers, as it is typically not part of formal academic training. We present a range of practices tailored to different levels of programming experience, from beginners to advanced users. Our ten principles help researchers streamline and automate their projects, reduce human error, and improve the quality and reusability of their code. For principal investigators, we highlight the benefits of fostering a collaborative environment that values code sharing. Maintaining basic standards for code quality, reusability, and shareability is critical for increasing the trustworthiness and reliability of research in experimental psychology and cognitive neuroscience.
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.