Measurement and Power 1. Bakker, M., Hartgerink, C. H., Wicherts, J. M., & van der Maas, H. L. (2016). Researchers’ intuitions about power in psychological research. Psychological science, 27(8), 1069-1077. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0956797616647519 2. Greenland, S., Senn, S. J., Rothman, K. J., Carlin, J. B., Poole, C., Goodman, S. N., & Altman, D. G. (2016). Statistical tests, p values, confidence intervals, and power: a guide to misinterpretations. European Journal of Epidemiology, 31(4), 337–50. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10654-016-0149-3 4. Loken, E., & Gelman, A. (2017). Measurement error and the replication crisis. Science, 10, 584-585. http://science.sciencemag.org/content/355/6325/584 Researcher Degrees of Freedom 1. Dragicevic, P., Jansen, Y., Sarma, A., Kay, M., & Chevalier, F. (2019, April). Increasing the Transparency of Research Papers with Explorable Multiverse Analyses. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (p. 65). ACM. https://hal.inria.fr/hal-01976951/document 2. Rubin, M. (2017). When does HARKing hurt? Identifying when different types of undisclosed post hoc hypothesizing harm scientific progress. Review of General Psychology, 21(4), 308- 320. https://psyarxiv.com/un372/ 3. Wicherts, J. M., Veldkamp, C. L., Augusteijn, H. E., Bakker, M., Van Aert, R. C., & Van Assen, M. A. (2016). Degrees of freedom in planning, running, analyzing, and reporting psychological studies A checklist to avoid p-hacking. Frontiers in Psychology, 1–12. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01832/full Pre-registration and Registered Reports 1. Chambers, C. D., et al. (2014). Instead of “playing the game” it is time to change the rules: Registered Reports at AIMS Neuroscience and beyond. AIMS Neuroscience, 1, 4-17. http://orca.cf.ac.uk/59475/ 2. Lin, W., & Green, D. P. (2016). Standard operating procedures: A safety net for preanalysis plans. PS: Political Science & Politics, 49(3), 495-500. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/ps-political-science-and-politics/article/standard-operating-procedures-a-safety-net-for-preanalysis-plans/5C5750CD150DC4DAD964263437DB7FA2 3. Nosek, B. A., Ebersole, C. R., DeHaven, A. C., & Mellor, D. T. (2018). The preregistration revolution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(11), 2600-2606. https://www.pnas.org/content/115/11/2600.short To Theory or Not to Theory 1. 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. http://meehl.dl.umn.edu/sites/g/files/pua1696/f/113theoreticalrisks.pdf 2. Meehl, P. E. (1990). Why summaries of research on psychological theories are often uninterpretable. Psychological Reports, 66(1), 195–244. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.2466/pr0.1990.66.1.195 Reproducibility Across Different Areas of Psychological Science and Beyond 1. Baker, M. (2016). 1,500 scientists lift the lid on reproducibility. Nature News, 533(7604), 452. https://www.nature.com/news/1-500-scientists-lift-the-lid-on-reproducibility-1.19970 2. Gelman, A. (2016). Why does the replication crisis seem worse in psychology? Slate. http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2016/10/why_the_replication_crisis_seems_worse_in_psychology.html 3. Gelman, A. (2019). Should we talk less about bad social science research and more about bad medical research? https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2019/03/24/should-we-talk-less-about-bad-social-science-research-and-more-about-bad-medical-research/ 4. Ioannidis, J. P. (2012). Why science is not necessarily self-correcting. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(6), 645-654. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1745691612464056 The Scientific Incentive Structure and Cultural Reform 1. Edwards, M. A., & Roy, S. (2017). Academic research in the 21st century: Maintaining scientific integrity in a climate of perverse incentives and hypercompetition. Environmental Engineering Science, 34(1), 51-61. https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/full/10.1089/ees.2016.0223 2. Lilienfeld, S. O. (2017). Psychology’s replication crisis and the grant culture: Righting the ship. Perspectives on psychological science, 12(4), 660-664. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1745691616687745 3. Nosek, B. A., Spies, J. R., & Motyl, M. (2012). Scientific utopia II: Restructuring incentives and practices to promote truth over publishability. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 615-631. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1745691612459058