Publish or perish. For decades, that has been a rule of thumb in academia. Certainly, while systems for the review and advancement of academic employees vary across the globe, published scholarship is generally a major requirement for an individual to obtain employment, tenure where applicable, and/or promotion. Merit raises also may be dependent on the frequency, or total number, of publications. It therefore should be of little surprise that researchers have powerful incentives to see their work in print. Regrettably, the need to publish has resulted in practices that reflect questionable ethics that threaten the field's knowledge base. These questionable practices include, but are not limited to: • p-hacking, or the misreporting of true effect sizes resulting from researchers collecting or selecting data or statistical analyses until nonsignificant results become significant, thereby yielding false positives (Head et al., 2015), • HARKing ("Hypothesizing After the Results are Known"), or presenting a post hoc hypothesis as if it were an a priori hypothesis (Kerr, 1998), and • QRPs (Questionable Research Practices), such as p-value rounding and excluding data after looking at the impact of doing so on the results, and failing to report all of a study's dependent measures (John, Loewenstein, & Prelec, 2012).
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.