Open Science Research Priorities in Health Psychology

Abstract

Objective: Research on Open Science practices in Health Psychology is lacking. This study aimed to identify research question priorities and obtain consensus on the Top 5 prioritised research questions for Open Science in Health Psychology.Methods and measures: An international Delphi consensus study was conducted. Twenty-three experts in Open Science and Health Psychology within the European Health Psychology Society (EHPS) suggested research question priorities to create a ‘long-list’ of items (Phase 1). Forty-three EHPS members rated the importance of these items, ranked their top five and suggested their own additional items (Phase 2). Twenty-four EHPS members received feedback on Phase 2 responses and then re-rated and re-ranked their top five research questions (Phase 3).Results: The top five ranked research question priorities were: 1. “To what extent are Open Science behaviours currently practised in Health Psychology?”, 2. “How can we maximise the usefulness of Open Data and Open Code resources?”, 3. “How can Open Data be increased within Health Psychology?”, 4. “What interventions are effective for increasing the adoption of Open Science in Health Psychology?” and 5. “How can we increase free Open Access publishing in Health Psychology?”.Conclusion: Funding and resources should prioritise the research questions identified here.

Demystifying Open Science in Health Psychology and Behavioral Medicine: A Practical Guide to Registered Reports and Data Notes

“…2021). To support these priority actions, the EHPS Open Science Special Interest Group was established in 2020 (Norris & Toomey, 2020) and is developing a suite of training and support resources for health psychology and behavioral medicine researchers in Open Science. The group also conducts primary research on Open Science within the field of health psychology, including a recent Delphi research prioritisation exercise to establish consensus amongst EHPS members on a clear starting point for this research (Norris et al, 2022).…”

“…Science training must also be routinely embedded within graduate training programmes: with outstanding Open Educational Resources now available to support this, such as PaPOR Trail (Egan et al, 2020;Pownall et al, 2021). Finally, international organisations representing research and practice in health psychology and behavioral medicine could do more to better support and advocate for Open Science, extending work of groups such as the European Health Psychology Society for Open Science Special Interest Group (Norris & Toomey, 2020).…”

Toward equitable open research: stakeholder co-created recommendations for research institutions, funders and researchers

“…These approaches use a combination of established qualitative social science methods, like focus groups and workshops, to craft a modified approach that includes traditional 'closed' anonymous surveys with 'open' face-toface discussion [78,79]. Modifying the Delphi method in this way allows it to be used as a co-creation method-now commonly deployed as such in Open Research and RRI projects [80][81][82][83][84].…”