Date created: | Last Updated:

Category: Project

Description: There is currently extensive debate in psychological science about how to improve the field’s replicability (e.g. Kruglanski, Chernikova, & Jasko, 2017; Lindsay, 2015). In this paper I explore the meta-scientific question of who is pushing for changes to the way research is done, and why. I use the social identity model of collective action (SIMCA; Van Zomeren, Postmes, & Spears, 2008) to derive (pre-registered) hypotheses about how researchers’ identity as academic psychologists, their efficacy, and their sense of satisfaction relate to their willingness to engage in reformative research practices. Results show that efficacy and collective satisfaction are consistent predictors of collective action, participating in direct replication projects, and pre-registering one’s studies. Practical implications of these findings are discussed.