Briney, K. (2015). Data management for researchers: Organize, maintain and share your data for research success. Exeter: Pelagic Publishing Ltd.Google Scholar

Christensen, G., Freese, J., & Miguel, E. (2019). Transparent and reproducible social science research: How to do open science. Oakland, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar

Christensen, G., Wang, Z., Paluck, E. L., Swanson, N., Birke, D. J., Miguel, E., & Littman, R. (2019, October 18). Open science practices are on the rise: The State of Social Science (3S) survey. https://doi.org/10.31222/osf.io/5rksuGoogle Scholar

Gernsbacher, M. A. (2018). Writing empirical articles: Transparency, reproducibility, clarity, and memorability. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 1(3), 403–414.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Kathawalla, U. K., Silverstein, P., & Syed, M. (2021). Easing into open science: A guide for graduate students and their advisors. Collabra: Psychology, 7(1), 18684.Google Scholar

Aczel, B., Szaszi, B., Sarafoglou, A., Kekecs, Z., Kucharský, Š., Benjamin, D., Chambers, C. D., Fisher, A., Gelman, A., Gernsbacher, M. A., Ioannidis, J., Johnson, E., Jonas, K., Kousta, S., Lilienfeld, S. O., Lindsay, S., Morey, C. C., Munafò, M., Newell, B. R., … & Wagenmakers, E. J. (2020). A consensus-based transparency checklist. Nature Human Behaviour, 4(1), 4–6. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-019-0772-6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Allen, C., & Mehler, D. M. (2019). Open science challenges, benefits and tips in early career and beyond. PLoS Biology, 17(5), e3000246. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3000246Google Scholar

Arslan, R. C. (2019). How to automatically document data with the codebook package to facilitate data reuse. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 2, 169–187. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245919838783CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Aust, F., & Barth, M. (2020, July 7). papaja: Create APA manuscripts with R Markdown. https://github.com/crsh/papajaGoogle Scholar

Bakan, D. (1966). The test of significance in psychological research. Psychological Bulletin, 66(6), 423–437. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0020412Google Scholar

Benning, S. D., Bachrach, R. L., Smith, E. A., Freeman, A. J., & Wright, A. G. C. (2019). The registration continuum in clinical science: A guide toward transparent practices. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 128(6), 528–540. https://doi.org/10.1037/abn0000451Google Scholar

Bishop, D. V. (2020). The psychology of experimental psychologists: Overcoming cognitive constraints to improve research: The 47th Sir Frederic Bartlett Lecture. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 73(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747021819886519CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Bosnjak, M., Fiebach, C., Mellor, D. T., Mueller, S., O’Connor, D. B., Oswald, F. L., & Sokol-Chang, R. (2021, February 22). A template for preregistration of quantitative research in psychology: Report of the Joint Psychological Societies Preregistration Task Force. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/d7m5rGoogle Scholar

Bradley, J. C., Lang, A. S., Koch, S., & Neylon, C. (2011). Collaboration using open notebook science in academia. In Elkins, S., Lang, A. S., Koch, S., & Neylon, C. (Eds.), Collaborative computational technologies for biomedical research (pp. 423–452). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118026038.ch25CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brandt, M. J., IJzerman, H., Dijksterhuis, A., Farach, F. J., Geller, J., Giner-Sorolla, R., Grange, J. A., Perugini, M., Spies, J. R., & van ’t Veer, A. (2014). The replication recipe: What makes for a convincing replication? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 50, 217–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2013.10.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Briney, K. (2015). Data management for researchers: Organize, maintain and share your data for research success. Exeter: Pelagic Publishing Ltd.Google Scholar

Buchanan, E. M., Crain, S. E., Cunningham, A. L., Johnson, H. R., Stash, H., Papadatou-Pastou, M., Isager, P. M., Carlsson, R., & Aczel, B. (2021). Getting started creating data dictionaries: How to create a shareable data set. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 4(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245920928007Google Scholar

Button, K., Ioannidis, J., Mokrysz, C., Nosek, B. A., Flint, J., Robinson, E. S. J., & Munafò, M. R. (2013). Power failure: Why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 14, 365–376. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn3475Google Scholar

Campbell, L. (2018, January 29). Week 3: Open notebook. https://web.archive.org/web/20210309195308/https://www.lornecampbell.org/?p=179Google Scholar

Chambers, C. D. (2013). Registered Reports: A new publishing initiative at Cortex. Cortex, 49(3), 609–610. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2012.12.016CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Christensen, G., Freese, J., & Miguel, E. (2019). Transparent and reproducible social science research: How to do open science. Oakland, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar

Cohen, J. (1994). The earth is round (p<. 05). American Psychologist, 49(12), 997–1003. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.49.12.997Google Scholar

Corker, K. S. (2016, January 15). PMG Lab – Project template. https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/SJTYRCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Crüwell, S., & Evans, N. J. (2020, September 19). Preregistration in complex contexts: A preregistration template for the application of cognitive models. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/2hykxCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Da Silva Frost, A., & Ledgerwood, A. (2020). Calibrate your confidence in research findings: A tutorial on improving research methods and practices. Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology, 14, E14. https://doi.org/10.1017/prp.2020.7CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Devezer, B., Navarro, D. J., Vandekerckhove, J., & Buzbas, E. O. (2021). The case for formal methodology in scientific reform. Royal Society Open Science, 8, 200805. https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.04.26.048306CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Dirnagl, U. (2019). Preregistration of exploratory research: Learning from the golden age of discovery. PLoS Biology, 18(3), e3000690. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3000690Google Scholar

Errington, T. M. (2019, September 5). Reproducibility Project: Cancer Biology – Barriers to replicability in the process of research. https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/KPR7UCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gernsbacher, M. A. (2018). Writing empirical articles: Transparency, reproducibility, clarity, and memorability. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 1(3), 403–414. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245918754485Google Scholar

Goldacre, B., Drysdale, H., Dale, A., Milosevic, I., Slade, E., Hartley, P., Marston, C., Powell-Smith, A., Heneghan, C., & Mahtani, K. R. (2019). COMPare: a prospective cohort study correcting and monitoring 58 misreported trials in real time. Trials, 20(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-019-3173-2Google Scholar

Flannery, J. E. (2020, October 22). fMRI Preregistration Template. https://osf.io/6juftGoogle Scholar

Flourney, J. C., Vijayakumar, N., Cheng, T. W., Cosme, D., Flannery, J. E., & Pfeifer, J. H. (2020). Improving practices and inferences in developmental cognitive neuroscience. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 45, 100807 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcn.2020.100807CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hagger, M. S., Chatzisarantis, N. L. D., Alberts, H., Anggono, C. O., Batailler, C., Birt, A. R., Brand, R., Brandt, M. J., Brewer, G., Bruyneel, S., Calvillo, D. P., Campbell, W. K., Cannon, P. R., Carlucci, M., Carruth, N. P., Cheung, T., Crowell, A., De Ridder, D. T. D., Dewitte, S., … Zwienenberg, M. (2016). A multilab preregistered replication of the ego-depletion effect. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 11(4), 546–573. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691616652873CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Harris, C. R., Coburn, N., Rohrer, D., & Pashler, H. (2013). Two failures to replicate high-performance-goal priming effects. PLoS One, 8(8), e72467. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0072467CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Haven, T. L., & Van Grootel, L. (2019). Preregistering qualitative research. Accountability in Research, 26(3), 229–244. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2019.1580147Google Scholar

Haven, T. L., Errington, T. M., Gleditsch, K. S., van Grootel, L., Jacobs, A. M., Kern, F. G., Piñeiro, R., Rosenblatt, F., & Mokkink, L. B. (2020). Preregistering qualitative research: A Delphi study. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 19, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406920976417Google Scholar

Havron, N., Bergmann, C., & Tsuji, S. (2020). Preregistration in infant research – A primer. Infancy, 25(5), 734–754. https://doi.org/10.1111/infa.12353Google Scholar

Henry, T. R. (2021a, February 26). Data Management for Researchers: Three Tales. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/ga9yfCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Henry, T. R. (2021b, February 26). Data Management for Researchers: 8 Principles of Good Data Management. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/5tmfeGoogle Scholar

John, L. K., Loewenstein, G., & Prelec, D. (2012). Measuring the prevalence of questionable research practices with incentives for truth telling. Psychological Science, 23(5), 524–532. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611430953CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Johnson, A. H., & Cook, B. G. (2019). Preregistration in single-case design research. Exceptional Children, 86(1), 95–112. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402919868529CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kathawalla, U. K., Silverstein, P., & Syed, M. (2021). Easing into open science: A guide for graduate students and their advisors. Collabra: Psychology, 7(1), 18684. https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.18684CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kerr, N. L. (1998). HARKing: Hypothesizing after the results are known. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2(3), 196–217. https://doi.org/10.1207/2Fs15327957pspr0203_4CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Kirtley, O. J., Lafit, G., Achterhof, R., Hiekkaranta, A. P., & Myin-Germeys, I. (2021). Making the black box transparent: A template and tutorial for registration of studies using experience-sampling methods. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 4(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245920924686Google Scholar

Klein, O., Hardwicke, T. E., Aust, F., Breuer, J., Danielsson, H., Mohr, A. H., IJzerman, H., Nilsonne, G., Vanpaemel, W., & Frank, M. C. (2018). A practical guide for transparency in psychological science. Collabra: Psychology, 4(1), 20. https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.158CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Koessler, R. B., Campbell, L., & Kohut, T. (2019, February 27). Open notebook. https://osf.io/3n964/Google Scholar

Krypotos, A.-M., Klugkist, I., Mertens, G., & Engelhard, I. M. (2019). A step-by-step guide on preregistration and effective data sharing for psychopathology research. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 128(6), 517–527. https://doi.org/10.1037/abn0000424CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Ledgerwood, A. (2018). The preregistration revolution needs to distinguish between predictions and analyses. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(45), E10516–E10517. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1812592115Google Scholar

Markowetz, F. (2015). Five selfish reasons to work reproducibly. Genome Biology, 16, 274. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13059-015-0850-7Google Scholar

McKiernan, E. C., Bourne, P. E., Brown, C. T., Buck, S., Kenall, A., Lin, J., McDougall, D., Nosek, B. A., Ram, K., Soderberg, C. K., Spies, J. R., Thaney, K., Updegrove, A., Woo, K. H., & Yarkoni, T. (2016). Point of view: How open science helps researchers succeed. eLife, 5, e16800. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.16800CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Meehl, P. E. (1978). Theoretical risks and tabular asterisks: Sir Karl, Sir Ronald, and the slow progress of soft psychology. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 46(4), 806–834. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.46.4.806Google Scholar

Mertens, G., & Krypotos, A.-M. (2019). Preregistration of analyses of preexisting data. Psychologica Belgica, 59(1), 338–352. http://doi.org/10.5334/pb.493Google Scholar

Mertzen, D., Lago, S., & Vasishth, S. (2021, March 4). The benefits of preregistration for hypothesis-driven bilingualism research. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/nm3egCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Moher, D., Shamseer, L., Clarke, M. Ghersi, D., Liberati, A., Petticrew, M., Shekelle, P., Stewart, L. A., & PRISMA-P Group. (2015). Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Systematic Reviews, 4(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-4-1Google Scholar

Moreau, D., & Wiebels, K. (2021). Assessing change in intervention research: The benefits of composite outcomes. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 4(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245920931930Google Scholar

Moshontz, H., Campbell, L., Ebersole, C. R., IJzerman, H., Urry, H. L., Forscher, P. S., … Chartier, C. R. (2018). The Psychological Science Accelerator: Advancing psychology through a distributed collaborative network. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 1(4), 501–515. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245918797607Google Scholar

Navarro, D. (2019, January 17). Prediction, pre-specification and transparency [blog post]. https://featuredcontent.psychonomic.org/prediction-pre-specification-and-transparency/Google Scholar

Nelson, L. D., Simmons, J., & Simonsohn, U. (2018). Psychology’s renaissance. Annual Review of Psychology, 69, 511–534. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-122216-011836Google Scholar

Nosek, B. A., Alter, G., Banks, G. C., Borsboom, D., Bowman, S. D., Breckler, S. J., Buck, S., Chambers, C. D., Chin, G., Christensen, G., Contestabile, M., Dafoe, A., Eich, E., Freese, J., Glennerster, R., Goroff, D., Green, D. P., Hesse, B., Humphreys, M., … Yarkoni, T. (2015). Promoting an open research culture. Science, 348(6242), 1422–1425. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aab2374Google Scholar

Nuijten, M. B., Hartgerink, C. H., Van Assen, M. A., Epskamp, S., & Wicherts, J. M. (2016). The prevalence of statistical reporting errors in psychology (1985–2013). Behavior Research Methods, 48(4), 1205–1226. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-015-0664-2Google Scholar

Obels, P., Lakens, D., Coles, N. A., Gottfried, J., & Green, S. A. (2020). Analysis of open data and computational reproducibility in Registered Reports in psychology. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 229–237. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245920918872CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Open Science Collaboration. (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349(6251), aac4716. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aac4716CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Page, M. J., Shamseer, L., & Tricco, A. C. (2018). Registration of systematic reviews in PROSPERO: 30,000 records and counting. Systematic Reviews, 7(1), 32. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-018-0699-4Google Scholar

Paul, M., Govaart, G., & Schettino, A. (2021, March 1). Making ERP research more transparent: Guidelines for preregistration. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/4tgveCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Peikert, A., & Brandmaier, A. M. (2019, November 11). A reproducible data analysis workflow with R Markdown, Git, Make, and Docker. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/8xzqyCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Platt, J. R. (1964). Strong inference. Science, 146(3642), 347–353. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1714268Google Scholar

Roettger, T. B. (2021). Preregistration in experimental linguistics: Applications, challenges, and limitations. Linguistics, 59, 1227–1249. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/vc9huGoogle Scholar

Rouder, J. N. (2016). The what, why, and how of born-open data. Behavior Research Methods, 48(3), 1062–1069. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-015-0630-zGoogle Scholar

Rouder, J. N., Haaf, J. M., & Snyder, H. K. (2019). Minimizing mistakes in psychological science. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 2(1), 3–11. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245918801915Google Scholar

Shamseer, L., Moher, D., Clarke, M., Ghersi, D., Liberati, A., Petticrew, M., Shekelle, P., Stewart, L. A., & the Group, PRISMA-P. (2015). Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: Elaboration and explanation. BMJ, 350, g7647. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g7647CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., & Simonsohn, U. (2011). False-positive psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant. Psychological Science, 22(11), 1359–1366. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611417632Google Scholar

Smaldino, P. E., & McElreath, R. (2016). The natural selection of bad science. Royal Society Open Science, 3(9), 160384. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.160384Google Scholar

Soderberg, C. K. (2018). Using OSF to share data: A step-by-step guide. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 1(1), 115–120. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245918757689Google Scholar

Spellman, B. A. (2015). A short (personal) future history of revolution 2.0. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(6), 886–899. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691615609918CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stodden, V., Seiler, J., & Ma, Z. (2018). An empirical analysis of journal policy effectiveness for computational reproducibility. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115, 2584–2589. https://10.1073/pnas.1708290115CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Tackett, J. L., Brandes, C. M., Dworak, E. M., & Shields, A. N. (2020). Bringing the (pre)registration revolution to graduate training. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienne, 61(4), 299–309. https://doi.org/10.1037/cap0000221CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Tenney, E., Costa, E., Allard, A., & Vazire, S. (2021). Open science and reform practices in organizational behavior research over time (2011 to 2019). Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 162, 218–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2020.10.015Google Scholar

Topor, M., Pickering, J. S., Barbosa Mendes, A., Bishop, D. V. M., Büttner, F. C., Elsherif, M. M., Evans, T. R., Henderson, E. L., Kalandadze, T., Nitschke, F. T., Staaks, J. P. C., van den Akker, O., Yeung, S. K., Zaneva, M., Lam, A., Madan, C. R., Moreau, D., O’Mahony, A., Parker, A., … Westwood, S. J. (2021, March 5). An integrative framework for planning and conducting Non-Interventional, Reproducible, and Open Systematic Reviews (NIRO-SR). https://doi.org/10.31222/osf.io/8gu5zGoogle Scholar

van ’t Veer, A. E., & Giner-Sorolla, R. (2016). Pre-registration in social psychology – A discussion and suggested template. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 67, 2–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2016.03.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Van den Akker, O., Peters, G.-J. Y., Bakker, C., Carlsson, R., Coles, N. A., Corker, K. S., Feldman, G., Mellor, D., Moreau, D., Nordström, T., Pfeiffer, N., Pickering, J., Riegelman, A., Topor, M., van Veggel, N., & Yeung, S. K. (2020, September 15). Inclusive systematic review registration form. https://doi.org/10.31222/osf.io/3nbeaGoogle Scholar

Van den Akker, O., Weston, S. J., Campbell, L., Chopik, W. J., Damian, R. I., Davis-Kean, P., Hall, A. N., Kosie, J., E., Kruse, E., Olsen, J., Ritchie, S. J., Valentine, K. D., van ’t Veer, A., & Bakker, M. (2021, February 21). Preregistration of secondary data analysis: A template and tutorial. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/hvfmrCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Vazire, S. (2018). Implications of the credibility revolution for productivity, creativity, and progress. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 13(4), 411–417. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691617751884CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Vazire, S., & Holcombe, A. O. (2020, August 13). Where are the self-correcting mechanisms in science? https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/kgqztGoogle Scholar

Vazire, S., Schiavone, S. R., & Bottesini, J. G. (2020, October 7). Credibility beyond replicability: Improving the four validities in psychological science. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/bu4d3Google Scholar

Vuorre, M., & Curley, J. P. (2018). Curating research assets: A tutorial on the Git version control system. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 1(2), 219–236. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245918754826Google Scholar

Wagenmakers, E.-J., Beek, T., Dijkhoff, L., Gronau, Q. F., Acosta, A., Adams, R. B., Albohn, D. N., Allard, E. S., Benning, S. D., Blouin-Hudon, E.-M., Bulnes, L. C., Caldwell, T. L., Calin-Jageman, R. J., Capaldi, C. A., Carfagno, N. S., Chasten, K. T., Cleeremans, A., Connell, L., DeCicco, J. M., … Zwaan, R. A. (2016). Registered Replication Report: Strack, Martin, & Stepper (1988). Perspectives on Psychological Science, 11(6), 917–928. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691616674458CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Weston, S. J., Ritchie, S. J., Rohrer, J. M., & Przybylski, A. K. (2019). Recommendations for increasing the transparency of analysis of preexisting data sets. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 2(3), 214–227. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245919848684CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Baum, N., & Boughton, L. (2016). Public speaking: Managing challenging people and situations. The Journal of Medical Practice Management, 31, 251–253.Google Scholar

Bekker, S., & Clark, A. M. (2018). Improving qualitative research findings presentations. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 17, 160940691878633. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406918786335Google Scholar

Blome, C., Sondermann, H., & Augustin, M. (2017). Accepted standards on how to give a Medical Research Presentation: A systematic review of expert opinion papers. GMS Journal for Medical Education, 34(1).Google ScholarPubMed

Cohen, J. (1990). Things I have learned (so far). American Psychologist, 45, 1304–1312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Collins, J. (2004). Giving a PowerPoint presentation: The art of communicating effectively. Radiographics, 24(4), 1185–1192. https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.244035179CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Drotar, D. (2000). Presenting scientific data. In Drotar, D. (Ed.), Handbook of research in pediatric and clinical child psychology (pp. 329–345). New York: Plenum.Google Scholar

Gorham, J., Cohen, S. H., & Morris, T. L. (1999). Fashion in the classroom III: Effects of instructor attire and immediacy in natural classroom interactions. Communication Quarterly, 47, 281–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Grech, V. (2018a). WASP (Write A Scientific Paper): Optimisation of PowerPoint presentations and skills. Early Human Development, 125, 53–56. doi:10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2018.06.006Google Scholar

Grech, V. (2018b). WASP (Write a Scientific Paper): Preparing a poster. Early Human Development, 125, 57–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2018.06.007Google Scholar

Grech, V. (2019). Presenting scientific work-news media theory in presentations, abstracts, and posters. Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia, 13(5), S59–S62. doi.org/10.4103/sja.SJA_556_18">doi.org/10.4103/sja.SJA_556_18Google Scholar

Hoff, R. (1988). I can see you naked: A fearless guide to making great presentations. New York: Universal Press.Google Scholar

Lefor, A. K., & Maeno, M. (2016). Preparing scientific papers, posters, and slides. Journal of Surgical Education, 73(2), 286–290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsurg.2015.09.020Google Scholar

Regula, J. (2020). How to Prepare Educational Lecture: EAGEN 50 years of experience. Digestive Diseases, 38(Suppl. 2), 100–103. doi.org/10.1159/000505324">doi.org/10.1159/000505324Google Scholar

Skinner, B. F. (1953). Science and human behavior (pp. 242–256). New York: Macmillan Company.Google Scholar

Wellstead, G., Whitehurst, K., Gundogan, B., & Agha, R. (2017). How to deliver an oral presentation. International Journal of Surgery Oncology, 2(6), e25. doi.org/10.1097/ij9.0000000000000025">doi.org/10.1097/ij9.0000000000000025Google Scholar

Wilder, C. (1994). The presentations kit: Ten steps for selling your ideas. New York: Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar

Williams, J. B. W. (1995). How to deliver a sensational scientific talk. In Pequegnat, W. & Stover, E. (Eds.), How to write a successful research grant application: A guide for social and behavioral scientists (pp. 171–176). New York: Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wolpe, J. (1977). The acquisition, augmentation and extinction of neurotic habits. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 15, 303–304.Google Scholar

Zerwic, J. J., Grandfield, K., Kavanaugh, K., Berger, B., Graham, L., & Mershon, M. (2010). Tips for better visual elements in posters and podium presentations. Educational Health (Abingdon), 23(2), 267–273.Google Scholar

Aalbersberg, I. J., Appleyard, T., Brookhart, S., Carpenter, T., Clarke, M., Curry, S., Dahl, J., DeHaven, A., Eich, E., Franko, M., Freedman, L., Graf, C., Grant, S., Hanson, B., Joseph, H., Kiermer, V., Kramer, B., Kraut, A., Karn, R. K., … Vazire, S. (2018, February 15). Making science transparent by default; Introducing the TOP Statement. https://osf.io/sm78t/?_ga=2.66881262.1762683141.1579096697-214340795.1579096697Google Scholar

Alberts, B. (2013). Editorial: Impact factor distortions. Science, 340, 787.Google Scholar

American Educational Research Association. (2006). Standards for reporting on empirical social science research in AERA publications. Educational Researcher, 35, 33–40.Google Scholar

American Psychological Association. (2020a). APA and affiliated journals. Online at www.apa.org/pubs/journalsGoogle Scholar

American Psychological Association. (2020b). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (7th ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar

Appelbaum, M., Cooper, H., Kline, R. B., Mayo-Wilson, E., Nezu, A. M., & Rao, S. M. (2018). Journal article reporting standards for quantitative research in psychology: The APA Publications and Communications Board task force report. American Psychologist, 73(1), 3–25.Google Scholar

Association for Psychological Science. (2020). APS journals. On line at www.psychologicalscience.org/publicationsGoogle Scholar

Bailar, J. C. III., & Patterson, K. (1985). Journal of peer review: The need for a research agenda. New England Journal of Medicine, 312, 654–657.Google Scholar

Benos, D. J., Bashari, E., Chaves, J. M., Gaggar, A., Kapoor, N., LaFrance, M., Mans, R., Mayhew, D., McGowan, S., Polter, A., Qadri, Y., Sarfare, S., Schultz, K., Splittgerber, R., Stephenson, J., Tower, C., Walton, A. G., & Zotov, A. (2007). The ups and downs of peer review. Advances in Physiology Education, 31(2), 145–152.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Brainard, J. (2020). Articles in ‘predatory’ journals receive few or no citations. Science, 367(6474), 139.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Case, L., & Smith, T. B. (2000). Ethnic representation in a sample of the literature of applied psychology. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 68, 1107–1110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cicchetti, D. V. (1991). The reliability of the peer review for manuscript and grant submissions: A cross-disciplinary investigation. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 14, 119–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cooper, H. (2020). Reporting quantitative research in psychology: How to meet APA style journal article reporting standards (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar

De Los Reyes, A., & Kazdin, A. E. (2008). When the evidence says, “yes, no, and maybe so”: Attending to and interpreting inconsistent findings among evidence-based interventions. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17, 47–51.Google Scholar

DeHaven, A. (2017, May 23). Preregistration: A plan, not a prison. Retrieved from https://cos.io/blog/preregistration-plan-not-prison/Google Scholar

Des Jarlais, D. C., Lyles, C., Crepaz, N., & the TREND Group. (2004). Improving the reporting quality of nonrandomized evaluations of behavioral and public health interventions: The TREND statement. American Journal of Public Health, 94, 361–366.Google Scholar

Elson, M., Huff, M., & Utz, S. (2020). Meta science on peer review: testing the effects of study originality and statistical significance in a field experiment. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 3(1), 53–65.Google Scholar

Francis, G. (2012). The psychology of replication and replication in psychology. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(6), 585–594.Google Scholar

Gerber, A., Arceneaux, K., Boudreau, C., Dowling, C., Hillygus, S., Palfrey, T., Biggers, D. R., & Hendry, D. J. (2014). Reporting guidelines for experimental research: A report from the experimental research section standards committee. Journal of Experimental Political Science, 1(1), 81–98.Google Scholar

Gunther, A. (2011). PSYCLINE: Your guide to psychology and social science journals on the web. Retrieved August 2011 from www.psycline.org/journals/psycline.htmlGoogle Scholar

Hawkins, E. (2019, October 21). Journals test the Materials Design Analysis Reporting (MDAR) checklist of shemes and memes community. Blog from Nature.com. http://blogs.nature.com/ofschemesandmemes/author/lizhGoogle Scholar

Ioannidis, J. P. (2005). Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Medicine, 2(8), e124.Google Scholar

Kazdin, A. E. (2017). Research design in clinical psychology (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.Google Scholar

Kepes, S., McDaniel, M. A., Brannick, M. T., & Banks, G. C. (2013). Meta-analytic reviews in the organizational sciences: Two meta-analytic schools on the way to MARS (the Meta-Analytic Reporting Standards). Journal of Business and Psychology, 28(2), 123–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kirman, C. R., Simon, T. W., & Hays, S. M. (2019). Science peer review for the 21st century: Assessing scientific consensus for decision-making while managing conflict of interests, reviewer and process bias. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, 103, 73–85.Google Scholar

Lehrer, J. (2010). The truth wears off. The New Yorker. Available at www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/12/13/101213fa_fact_lehrerGoogle Scholar

Levelt, Noort, and Committees, Drenth (2012, November). Flawed science: The fraudulent research practices of social psychologist Diederik Stapel. Available at www.commissielevelt.nl/wp-content/uploads_per_blog/commissielevelt/2012/11/120695_Rapp_nov_2012_UK_web.pdfGoogle Scholar

Levitt, H. M., Bamberg, M., Creswell, J. W., Frost, D., Josselson, R., & Suárez-Orozco, C. (2018). Journal article reporting standards for qualitative research in psychology: The APA publications and communications board task force report. American Psychologist, 73, 26–46.Google Scholar

Ma, C., Liu, Y., Neumann, S., & Gao, X. (2017). Nicotine from cigarette smoking and diet and Parkinson disease: A review. Translational Neurodegeneration, 6(1), 18. https://translationalneurodegeneration.biomedcentral.com/track/pdf/10.1186/s40035-017-0090-8Google Scholar

Metcalf, J., & Crawford, K. (2016). Where are human subjects in big data research? The emerging ethics divide. Big Data & Society, 3(1), 2053951716650211.Google Scholar

Miller, L. R., & Das, S. K. (2007). Cigarette smoking and Parkinson’s disease. Experimental and Clinical Sciences International, 6, 93–99.Google Scholar

Moher, D., Schulz, K.F., & Altman, D. (2001). The CONSORT statement: Revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials. Journal of American Medical Association, 285, 1987–1991.Google Scholar

Moonesinghe, R., Khoury, M. J., & Janssens, A. C. J. W (2007). Most published research findings are false – But a little replication goes a long way. PLoS Medicine, 4(2), e28.Google Scholar

Nosek, B. A., Ebersole, C. R., DeHaven, A. C., & Mellor, D. T. (2018). The preregistration revolution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115, 2600–2606.Google Scholar

Pryczak, F. (2017). Writing empirical research reports: A basic guide for students of the social and behavioral sciences (8th ed.). Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar

Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., & Simonsohn, U. (2011). False-positive psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant. Psychological Science, 22, 1359–1366.Google Scholar

Smith, R. (2006). Peer review: A flawed process at the heart of science and journals. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 99, 178–182.Google Scholar

Spier, R. (2002). The history of the peer-review process. Trends in Biotechnology, 20, 357–358.Google Scholar

Stahel, P. F., & Moore, E. E. (2014). Peer review for biomedical publications: We can improve the system. BMC Medicine, 12(1), 179.Google Scholar

Suresh, S. (2011). Moving toward global science. Science, 333, 802.Google Scholar

Tate, R. L., Perdices, M., Rosenkoetter, U., McDonald, S., Togher, L., Shadish, W., Horner, R., Kratochwill, T., Barlow, D. H., Kazdin, A., Sampson, M., Shamseer, L., & Sampson, M. (2016). The Single-Case Reporting Guideline In BEhavioural Interventions (SCRIBE) 2016: Explanation and elaboration. Archives of Scientific Psychology, 4(1), 10–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Thomson Reuters. (2011). Journal search: Psychology. New York: Thomson Reuters. Retrieved August 2011 from http://science.thomsonreuters.com/cgi-bin/jrnlst/jlresults.cgi?PC=MASTER&Word=psychologyGoogle Scholar

Thursby, G. (2011). Psychology virtual library: Journals (electronic and print). Retrieved August 2011 from www.vl-site.org/psychology/journals.htmlGoogle Scholar

Von Elm, E., Altman, D. G., Egger, M., Pocock, S. J., Gøtzsche, P. C., & Vandenbroucke, J. P. (2007). The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: Guidelines for reporting observational studies. Annals of Internal Medicine, 147(8), 573–577.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Wakefield, A. J., Murch, S. H., Anthony, A., Linnell, J., Casson, D. M., Malik, M., Berelowitz, M., Dhillon, A. P., Thomson, M. A., Harvey, P., Valentine, A., Davies, S. E., & Walker-Smith, J. A. (1998). RETRACTED: Ileal-lymphoid-nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children. The Lancet, 351(9103), 637–641.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Watanabe, M., & Aoki, M. (2014, January 10). Researcher: Test data falsified in major Alzheimer’s disease project. The Ashai Shimbun. Available online at https://ajw.asahi.com/article/behind_news/social_affairs/AJ201401100085Google Scholar

Web of Science. (2011). 2010 Journal citation reports. New York: Thomson Reuters. Retrieved August 2011 from http://wokinfo.com/products_tools/analytical/jcr/Google Scholar

Yang, Y. T., Broniatowski, D. A., & Reiss, D. R. (2019). Government role in regulating vaccine misinformation on social media platforms. JAMA Pediatrics. Published online September 03, 2019.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Zimmer, M. (2010). “But the data is already public”: On the ethics of research in Facebook. Ethics and Information Technology, 12(4), 313–325.Google Scholar

Bain, K. (2004). How do they prepare to teach? In What the best college teachers do (pp. 48–67) Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Brookfield, S. (1995). Becoming a critically reflective teacher. San Francisco: Jossy-Bass.Google Scholar

Deslauriers, L., Schelew, E., & Wieman, C. (2011). Improved learning in a large-enrollment physics class. Science, 332, 862.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Diamond, R. M. (2008). Designing and assessing courses and curricula: A practical guide (3rd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar

Elbow, P. E. (1986). Embracing contraries. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Manning, S., & Johnson, K. (2011). The technology toolbelt for teaching. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar

Maslow, A. H. (1962). Toward a psychology of being. Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand.Google Scholar

Mayer, R. E., Paul, R. P., & Wittrock, M. C. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives (edited complete ed.,Anderson, L. W. & Krathwohl, D. R, Eds.). New York: Longman.Google Scholar

McKeachie, W. J. (1999). Teaching tips: Strategies, research and theory for college and university teachers (10th ed.). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar

Nilson, L. B. (2010). Teaching at its best: A research-based resource for college instructors (3rd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar

Steele, C. M. (2011). Whistling Vivaldi: How stereotypes affect us and what we can do. New York: W. W. Norton & Co.Google Scholar

Strayhorn, T. L. (2012). College students’ sense of belonging: A key to educational success for all students. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Wiggins, G. P., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar

Wulff, D. H. (2005). Aligning for learning: Strategies for teaching effectiveness. Bolton: Anker Publishing.Google Scholar

Alper, J. (1993). The pipeline is leaking women all the way along. Science, 260, 409–411. doi:10.1126/science.260.5106.409Google Scholar

American Psychological Association, Committee on Women in Psychology. (2017). The changing gender composition of psychology: Update and expansion of the 1995 task force report. Retrieved from www.apa.org/pi/women/programs/gender-composition/task-force-report.pdfGoogle Scholar

Amanatullah, E. T., & Morris, M. W. (2010). Negotiating gender roles: Gender differences in assertive negotiating are mediated by women’s fear of backlash and attenuated when negotiating on behalf of others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 256–267. doi:10.1037/a0017094Google Scholar

Artz, B., Goodall, A. H., & Oswald, A. J. (2018). Do women ask? Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, 57, 611–636. doi:10.1111/irel.12214Google Scholar

Bareket-Shavit, C., Goldie, P. D., Mortenson, E., & Roberts, S. O. (in preparation). Gender Inequality in Psychological Research. Manuscript in preparation.Google Scholar

Brower, A., & James, A. (2020). Research performance and age explain less than half of the gender pay gap in New Zealand universities. PLoS One, 15(1), Article e0226392. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0226392Google Scholar

Carter-Sowell, A. R., Dickens, D. D., Miller, G., & Zimmerman, C. A. (2016). Present but not accounted for: Examining how marginalized intersectional identities create a double bind for women of color in the academy. In Ballenger, J., Polnick, B., & Irby, B. (Eds.), Research on Women and Education Series. Women of color in STEM: Navigating the workforce (pp. 181–200). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar

Ceci, S. J., Ginther, D. K., Kahn, S., & Williams, W. M. (2014). Women in academic science: A changing landscape. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 15, 75–141. doi:10.1177/1529100614541236CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dworkin, J. D., Linn, K. A., Teich, E. G., Zurn, P., Shinohara, R. T., & Bassett, D. S. (2020). The extent and drivers of gender imbalance in neuroscience reference lists. Nature Neuroscience, 23, 918–926. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41593-020-0658-yGoogle Scholar

Geiger, A. W., Livingston, G., Bialik, K. (2019, May 6). Six facts about U.S. moms (Analysis of American Time Use Survey Data). Pew Research Center. Retrieved from www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/05/08/facts-about-u-s-mothers/Google Scholar

Guarino, C. M., & Borden, V. M. H. (2017). Faculty service loads and gender: Are women taking care of the academic family? Research in Higher Education, 58, 672–694. doi:10.1007/s11162-017-9454-2Google Scholar

Guy, B., & Arthur, B. (2020). Academic motherhood during COVID-19: Navigating our dual roles as educators and mothers. Gender, Work and Organization, 27, 887–899. doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12493">doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12493Google Scholar

Gruber, J., Mendle, J., Lindquist, K. A., Schmader, T., Clark, L. A., Bliss-Moreau, E., Akinola, M., Atlas, L., Barch, D. M., Barrett, L. F., Borelli, J. L., Brannon, T. N., Bunge, S. A., Campos, B., Cantlon, J., Carter, R., Carter-Sowell, A. R., Chen, S., Craske, M. G., … Williams, L. A. (2021). The future of women in psychological science. Perspectives in Psychological Science, 16, 483–516. doi: 10.1177/1745691620952789Google Scholar

Hechtman, L. A., Moore, N. P., Schulkey, C. E., Miklos, A. C., Calcagno, A. M., Aragon, R., & Greenberg, J. H. (2018). NIH funding longevity by gender. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115, 7943–7948. doi:10.1073/pnas.1800615115Google Scholar

Hengle, E. (2020). Publishing while female. Are women held to higher standards? Evidence from peer review. Retrieved from: www.erinhengel.com/research/publishing_female.pdfGoogle Scholar

King, M. M., Bergstrom, C. T., Correll, S. J., Jacquet, J., & West, J. D. (2017). Men set their own cites high: Gender and self-citation across fields and over time. Socius: Sociological Research for a Dynamic World, 3, 1–22. doi:10.1177/2378023117738903Google Scholar

Kugler, K. G., Reif, J. A. M., Kaschner, T., & Brodbeck, F. C. (2018). Gender differences in the initiation of negotiations: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 144, 198–222. doi:10.1037/bul0000135Google Scholar

Leslie, S. J., Cimpian, A., Meyer, M., & Freeland, E. (2015). Expectations of brilliance underlie gender distributions across academic disciplines. Science, 347, 262–265. doi:10.1126/science.1261375CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Lindquist, K. A., Gruber, J., Schleider, J. L., Beer, J. S., Bliss-Moreau, E., & Weinstock, L. (2020, November 25). Flawed data and unjustified conclusions cannot elevate the status of women in science. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/qn3aeGoogle Scholar

Magua, W., Zhu, X., Bhattacharya, A., Filut, A., Potvien, A., Leatherberry, R., Lee, Y.-G., Jens, M., Malikireddy, D., Carnes, M., & Kaatz, A. (2017). Are female applicants disadvantaged in National Institutes of Health peer review? Combining algorithmic text mining and qualitative methods to detect evaluative differences in R01 reviewers’ critiques. Journal of Women’s Health, 26, 560–570. doi:10.1089/jwh.2016.6021Google Scholar

Mason, M. A., Wolfinger, N. H., & Goulden, M. (2013). Do babies matter? Gender and family in the ivory tower. Piscataway, NJ: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar

Minello, A. (2020). The pandemic and the female academic. Nature. doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-01135-9">doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-01135-9doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-01135-9>Google Scholar

Minello, A., Martucci, S., & Manzo, L. K. (2021). The pandemic and the academic mothers: Present hardships and future perspectives. European Societies, 23(Suppl. 1), S82–S94. doi.org/10.1080/14616696.2020.1809690">doi.org/10.1080/14616696.2020.1809690Google Scholar

National Science Foundation, National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics. (2014). Survey of doctorate recipients, 2013. Retrieved from http://ncsesdata.nsf.gov/doctoratework/2013/Google Scholar

Odic, D., & Wojcik, E. H. (2020). The publication gender gap in psychology. American Psychologist, 75, 92–103. doi:10.1037/amp0000480CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Roberts, S. O., Bareket-Shavit, C., Dollins, F. A., Goldie, P. D., & Mortenson, E. (2020). Racial inequality in psychological research: Trends of the past and recommendations for the future. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 15(6), 1295–1309. doi:10.1177/1745691620927709Google Scholar

Sege, R., Nykiel-Bub, L., & Selk, S. (2015). Sex differences in institutional support for junior biomedical researchers. Journal of the American Medical Association, 314, 1175–1177. doi:10.1001/jama.2015.8517Google Scholar

Witteman, H. O., Hendricks, M., Straus, S., & Tannenbaum, C. (2019). Are gender gaps due to evaluation of the applicant or the science? A natural experiment at a national funding agency. The Lancet, 10171, 531–540. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32611-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wood, W., & Eagly, A. H. (2012). Biosocial construction of sex differences and similarities in behavior. In Olson, J. M. & Zanna, M. P. (Eds.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 46, pp. 55–123). New York: Academic Press. doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-394281-4.00002-7Google Scholar

Zimmerman, C. A., Carter-Sowell, A. R., & Xu, X. (2016). Examining workplace ostracism experiences in academia: Understanding how gender differences in the faculty ranks influence inclusive climates on campus. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, Article 753. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00753Google Scholar