Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (2)
Year of publication
- 2018 (2) (remove)
Document Type
- Journal article (1)
- Doctoral Thesis (1)
Language
- English (2)
Keywords
Institute
Although questionable research practices (QRPs) and p-hacking have received attention in recent years, little research has focused on their prevalence and acceptance in students. Students are the researchers of the future and will represent the field in the future. Therefore, they should not be learning to use and accept QRPs, which would reduce their ability to produce and evaluate meaningful research. 207 psychology students and fresh graduates provided self-report data on the prevalence and predictors of QRPs. Attitudes towards QRPs, belief that significant results constitute better science or lead to better grades, motivation, and stress levels were predictors. Furthermore, we assessed perceived supervisor attitudes towards QRPs as an important predictive factor. The results were in line with estimates of QRP prevalence from academia. The best predictor of QRP use was students’ QRP attitudes. Perceived supervisor attitudes exerted both a direct and indirect effect via student attitudes. Motivation to write a good thesis was a protective factor, whereas stress had no effect. Students in this sample did not subscribe to beliefs that significant results were better for science or their grades. Such beliefs further did not impact QRP attitudes or use in this sample. Finally, students engaged in more QRPs pertaining to reporting and analysis than those pertaining to study design. We conclude that supervisors have an important function in shaping students’ attitudes towards QRPs and can improve their research practices by motivating them well. Furthermore, this research provides some impetus towards identifying predictors of QRP use in academia.
Regulatory focus (RF) theory (Higgins, 1997) states that individuals follow different strategic concerns when focusing on gains (promotion) rather than losses (prevention). Applying the Reflective-Impulsive Model (RIM, Strack & Deutsch, 2004), this dissertation investigates RF’s influence on basic information processing, specifically semantic processing (Study 1), semantic (Study 2) and affective (Study 3) associative priming, and basic reflective operations (Studies 4-7). Study 1 showed no effect of RF on pre-activation of RF-related semantic concepts in a lexical decision task (LDT). Study 2 indicated that primes fitting a promotion focus improve performance in a LDT for chronically promotion-focused individuals, but not chronically prevention-focused individuals. However, the latter performed better when targets fit their focus. Stronger affect and arousal after processing valent words fitting an RF may explain this pattern. Study 3 showed some evidence for stronger priming effects for negative primes in a bona-fide pipeline task (Fazio et al., 1995) for chronically prevention-focused participants, while also providing evidence that situational prevention focus insulates individuals from misattributing the valence of simple primes. Studies 4-7 showed that a strong chronic prevention focus leads to greater negation effects for valent primes in an Affect Misattribution Procedure (Payne et al., 2005), especially when it fits the situation. Furthermore, Study 6 showed that these effects result from stronger weighting of negated valence rather than greater ease in negation. Study 7 showed that the increased negation effect is independent of time pressure. Broad implications are discussed, including how RF effects on basic processing may explain higher-order RF effects.