Questionable Research Practices Among Researchers in the Most Research-Productive Management Programs

Questionable research practices (QRPs) among researchers have been a source of concern in many fields of study. QRPs are often used to enhance the probability of achieving statistical significance which affects the likelihood of a paper being published. Using a sample of researchers from ten top research-productive management programs, we compared hypotheses tested in dissertations to those tested in journal articles derived from those dissertations to draw inferences concerning the extent of engagement in QRPs. Results indicated that QRPs related to changes in sample size and covariates were associated with unsupported dissertation hypotheses becoming supported in journal articles. Researchers also tended to exclude unsupported dissertation hypotheses from journal articles. Likewise, results suggested that many article hypotheses may have been created after the results were known (i.e., HARKed). Articles from prestigious journals contained a higher percentage of potentially HARKed hypotheses than those from less well-regarded journals. Finally, articles published in prestigious journals were associated with more QRP usage than less prestigious journals. QRPs increase in the percentage of supported hypotheses and effect sizes that likely result in overestimated population parameters. As such, results reported in articles published in our most prestigious journals may be less credible than previously believed

Videoconference Fatigue Exploring Changes in Fatigue after Videoconference Meetings during COVID-19

In response to the COVID-19 global health pandemic, many employees transitioned to remote work, which included remote meetings. With this sudden shift, workers and the media began discussing videoconference fatigue, a potentially new phenomenon of feeling tired and exhausted attributed to a videoconference. In the present study, we examine the nature of videoconference fatigue, when this phenomenon occurs, and what videoconference characteristics are associated with fatigue using a mixed methods approach. Thematic analysis of qualitative responses indicates that videoconference fatigue exists, often in near temporal proximity to the videoconference, and is affected by various videoconference characteristics. Quantitative data was collected each hour during five workdays from 55 employees who were working remotely because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Latent growth modeling results suggest that videoconferences at different times of the day are related to deviations in employee fatigue beyond what is expected based on typical fatigue trajectories. Results from multilevel modeling of 279 videoconference meetings indicate that turning off the microphone and having higher feelings of group belongingness are related to lower post-videoconference fatigue. Additional analyses suggest that higher levels of group belongingness are the most consistent protective factor against videoconference fatigue. Such findings have immediate practical implications for workers and organizations as they continue to navigate the still relatively new terrain of remote work

The trustworthiness of the cumulative knowledge in industrial/organizational psychology: The current state of affairs and a path forward

The goal of industrial/organizational (IO) psychology, is to build and organize trustworthy knowledge about people-related phenomena in the workplace. Unfortunately, as with other scientific disciplines, our discipline may be experiencing a “crisis of confidence” stemming from the lack of reproducibility and replicability of many of our field's research findings, which would suggest that much of our research may be untrustworthy. If a scientific discipline's research is deemed untrustworthy, it can have dire consequences, including the withdraw of funding for future research. In this focal article, we review the current state of reproducibility and replicability in IO psychology and related fields. As part of this review, we discuss factors that make it less likely that research findings will be trustworthy, including the prevalence of scientific misconduct, questionable research practices (QRPs), and errors. We then identify some root causes of these issues and provide several potential remedies. In particular, we highlight the need for improved research methods and statistics training as well as a re-alignment of the incentive structure in academia. To accomplish this, we advocate for changes in the reward structure, improvements to the peer review process, and the implementation of open science practices. Overall, addressing the current “crisis of confidence” in IO psychology requires individual researchers, academic institutions, and publishers to embrace system-wide change