Questionable research practices among Brazilian psychological researchers: Results from a replication study and an international comparison

Authors:
Ronaldo Pilati, João G. N. Modesto, Luiz Victorino, Raquel C. Hoersting, Teresa C. R. Joaquim, Maurício M. Sarmet, Jéssica E. M. Farias, André L. A. Rabelo
Published Online:
20 Nov 2019
DOI:
10.1002/ijop.12632

Additional Options

Research on scientific integrity is growing in psychology, and questionable research practices (QRPs) have received more attention due to its harmful effect on science. By replicating the procedures of previous research, the present study aimed at describing the use of QRPs among Brazilian psychological researchers and to make an international comparison with previous studies in other countries—the US and Italy. Two hundred and thirty‐two Brazilian researchers in the field of psychology answered questions related to 10 different QRPs. Brazilian researchers indicated a lower tendency to engage in two QRPs (failing to report all of a study's dependent measures; deciding whether to collect more data after looking to see whether the results were significant) when compared to their Italian and North American counterparts, but indicated a higher tendency to engage in two other QRPs (selectively reporting studies that “worked”; not reporting all of a study's conditions). Most of the sample did not admit integrity conflicts in their own research but indicated that others have integrity problems, as observed in previous studies. Those discrepancies could be attributed to contextual and systemic factors regarding different publication demands among the different nations. Further studies should focus on identifying the antecedents of QRPs.

© International Union of Psychological Science