Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40103615›Full record

ArticleAdvances in methods and practices in psychological science2024

A Delphi Study to Strengthen Research-Methods Training in Undergraduate Psychology Programs.

Robert T Thibault, Deborah Bailey-Rodriguez, James E Bartlett, Paul Blazey, Robin J Green, Madeleine Pownall, Marcus R Munafò

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Advances in methods and practices in psychological science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Robert T ThibaultMeta-Research Innovation Center at Stanford, Stanford University, Stanford, California.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6561-3962
Deborah Bailey-RodriguezPsychology Department, Faculty of Science & Technology, Middlesex University, London, England.
James E BartlettSchool of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4191-5245
Paul BlazeyFaculty of Medicine, Department of Family Practice, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8149-9514
Robin J GreenSchool of Psychology and Vision Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, England.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2615-4409
Madeleine PownallSchool of Psychology, University of Leeds, Leeds, England.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3734-8006
Marcus R MunafòSchool of Psychological Science, University of Bristol, Bristol, England.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4049-993X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Psychology programs often emphasize inferential statistical tests over a solid understanding of data and research design. This imbalance may leave graduates underequipped to effectively interpret research and employ data to answer questions. We conducted a two-round modified Delphi to identify the research-methods skills that the UK psychology community deems essential for undergraduates to learn. Participants included 103 research-methods instructors, academics, students, and nonacademic psychologists. Of 78 items included in the consensus process, 34 reached consensus. We coupled these results with a qualitative analysis of 707 open-ended text responses to develop nine recommendations for organizations that accredit undergraduate psychology programs-such as the British Psychological Society. We recommend that accreditation standards emphasize (1) data skills, (2) research design, (3) descriptive statistics, (4) critical analysis, (5) qualitative methods, and (6) both parameter estimation and significance testing; as well as (7) give precedence to foundational skills, (8) promote transferable skills, and (9) create space in curricula to enable these recommendations. Our data and findings can inform modernized accreditation standards to include clearly defined, assessable, and widely encouraged skills that foster a competent graduate body for the contemporary world.

Indexed as

accreditation standardsBritish Psychological SocietyconsensusDelphipsychology educationqualitative methodsreplicationresearch designresearch methodsstatisticsundergraduate

Identifiers

PMID40103615
PMCPMC7617501

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.