The DOI matches its Crossref record; 70 of the 70 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Science or Art? How Aesthetic Standards Grease the Way Through the Publication Bottleneck but Undermine Science
Abstract
The current crisis in psychological research involves issues of fraud, replication, publication bias, and false positive results. I argue that this crisis follows the failure of widely adopted solutions to psychology’s similar crisis of the 1970s. The untouched root cause is an information-economic one: Too many studies divided by too few publication outlets equals a bottleneck. Articles cannot pass through just by showing theoretical meaning and methodological rigor; their results must appear to support the hypothesis perfectly. Consequently, psychologists must master the art of presenting perfect-looking results just to survive in the profession. This favors aesthetic criteria of presentation in a way that harms science’s search for truth. Shallow standards of statistical perfection distort analyses and undermine the accuracy of cumulative data; narrative expectations encourage dishonesty about the relationship between results and hypotheses; criteria of novelty suppress replication attempts. Concerns about truth in research are emerging in other sciences and may eventually descend on our heads in the form of difficult and insensitive regulations. I suggest a more palatable solution: to open the bottleneck, putting structures in place to reward broader forms of information sharing beyond the exquisite art of present-day journal publication.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“researchers can confirm the absence of p -hacking in their research reports by (a) actively affirming the disclosure of their data collection stopping rule, data exclusions, measures, and manipulations (Simmons, Nelson, & Simonsohn, 2012), (b) providing logical and principled justifications for nonstandard data exclusions and analytical approaches (Giner-Sorolla, 2012, p. 568), (c) providing”
From Does preregistration improve the credibility of research findings? (2020) · cites this paper as Giner-Sorolla, 2012, p. 568
In the citing paper
“And, clean papers in which the evidence consistently supports the proposed conclusion are more likely to be published than papers with equivocal evidence, exceptions, or other uncertainties 16,17 .”
From Initial evidence of research quality of registered reports compared with the standard publishing model (2021) · cites this paper as [17]
Citations
Cites
Why Most Published Research Findings Are False
Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2005) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124 · Cited by 10,505
The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60214-2 · Cited by 8,822
Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., & Simonsohn, U. (2011) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0956797611417632 · Cited by 6,567
Chaiken, S. (1980) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-3514.39.5.752 · Cited by 5,516
Why Most Published Research Findings Are False
Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2005) · CHANCE · doi:10.1080/09332480.2005.10722754 · Cited by 4,702 · cited 3×
“It was in that field that Ioannidis (2005) declared that “most published research findings are false” because of incentives to publish only positive results.”
BackgroundCohen, J. (1994) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.49.12.997 · Cited by 4,003
The Handbook of Research Synthesis.
Howel, D., Cooper, H., & Hedges, L. V. (1995) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2533295 · Cited by 3,657
Processing Fluency and Aesthetic Pleasure: Is Beauty in the Perceiver's Processing Experience?
Reber, R., Schwarz, N., & Winkielman, P. (2004) · Personality and Social Psychology Review · doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr0804_3 · Cited by 3,149
Raise standards for preclinical cancer research
Begley, C. G., & Ellis, L. M. (2012) · Nature · doi:10.1038/483531a · Cited by 2,979 · cited 1×
“Confidence in the applied usefulness of the publication process has taken a hit, as clinical trials have demonstrated unusually low success rates when trying to reproduce academic results (Begley & Ellis, 2012; Prinz, Schlange, & Asadullah, 2011; Turner, Matthews, et al., 2008).”
ResultStatistical methods in psychology journals: Guidelines and explanations.
Wilkinson, L., & Task Force on Statistical Inference (1999) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.54.8.594 · Cited by 2,791
Research works printed but not linked: 10
- Carpenter D., 2007, Northwestern University Law Review, 101, 687
- 10.1037/0022-3514.39.5.752 · DOI · Paper page
- Chamberlin J., 2000, APA Monitor, 31, 36
- Eco U., 1985, Daedalus, 114, 161
- Gillie O., 1977, The Phi Delta Kappan, 58, 469
- ISI Web of Knowledge. (2012). Journal citation reports. Retrieved from http://admin-apps.webofknowledge.com/JCR/JCR?PointOfEntry=Home&SID=R2H17OMe9G5oN@26iil
- Kaiser C. R., 2012, Dialogue, 26, 8
- Pennington N., 1991, Cardozo Law Review, 13, 519
- Ritchie S. J., 2012, The Psychologist, 25, 346
- Voss J. F., 1999, Narrative comprehension, causality, and coherence: Essays in honor of Tom Trabasso, 235
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 201–273 of 273
Gerring, J. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108762519.013 · Cited by 2
Lieberman, E. S. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108762519.003 · Cited by 2
A strong alcoholic drink does not influence self-assessments of the big five personality traits
Paruzel‐Czachura, M., Sorokowska, A., Bianga, P., Sorokowski, P., & Gosling, S. D. (2022) · Current Psychology · doi:10.1007/s12144-022-04015-9 · Cited by 2
Replication in Evidence-Based Aphasia Treatments
Karidas, S., Hinckley, J. J., & Brekher, I. (2023) · Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research · doi:10.1044/2022_jslhr-21-00688 · Cited by 2
Psychology’s reform movement needs a reconceptualization of scientific expertise
Tunç, D. U., & Tunç, M. N. (2023) · Social Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.32872/spb.10303 · Cited by 3
Honoring God through scientific research: Navigating the ethics of publishing with our students
Kendall, D. L., & Campanario, S. C. (2016) · International Journal of Christianity & Education · doi:10.1177/2056997116637878 · Cited by 2
Pitfalls in Parapsychological Research
Hyman, R. (2017) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9781119095910.ch14 · Cited by 2
Hasselman, F., Seevinck, M. P., & Cox, R. F. A. (2019) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/b8csj · Cited by 2
Bertoldo, G. (2019) · Thesis Commons (OSF Preprints) · doi:10.31237/osf.io/w63h7 · Cited by 2
Moshontz, H. (2016) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/fj34p · Cited by 2
Laypeople Can Predict Which Social Science Studies ReplicatePreprint
Hoogeveen, S., Sarafoglou, A., & Wagenmakers, E. (2019) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/egw9d · Cited by 2
From a Physical to a Rhetorical Metaphor
Gibson, S. (2019) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108367943.008 · Cited by 1
Hypothetical nudges provide directional but noisy estimates of real behavior change
Gandhi, L., Kiyawat, A., Camerer, C. F., & Watts, D. J. (2025) · Communications Psychology · doi:10.1038/s44271-025-00339-x · Cited by 1
Schaarste is goed, maar de selectie moet beter
Seuren, L. M. (2016) · Tijdschrift voor taalbeheersing · doi:10.5117/tvt2016.2.seur · Cited by 1
Statistical Controversies in Psychological Science
Hales, A. H., & Wood, N. R. (2022) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-04968-2_9 · Cited by 2
Introduction to the Special Series: Examining the Special Education Research Base
Cook, B. G., & Therrien, W. J. (2025) · Remedial and Special Education · doi:10.1177/07419325251379789 · Cited by 1
Priming and Prejudice: The Bias Effect of Origin Information on Peer Review, Judgment and Evaluation
Victorino, L., Pilati, R., & Linhares, A. (2019) · Avances en Psicología Latinoamericana · doi:10.12804/revistas.urosario.edu.co/apl/a.5635 · Cited by 2
Lee, S. T. H. (2019) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00547 · Cited by 1
Not by Data Alone: The Promises and Pitfalls of Data Analysis in Understanding Consciousness
Droege, P. (2019) · European Review · doi:10.1017/s1062798719000036 · Cited by 1
Gerring, J., Mahoney, J., & Elman, C. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108762519.018 · Cited by 1
Gerring, J., & Cojocaru, L. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108762519.005 · Cited by 1
Gerring, J. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108762519.014 · Cited by 1
Gross, N., & Robertson, C. T. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108762519.017 · Cited by 1
History of Replication Failures in Psychology
Whitt, C. M., Miranda, J. F., & Tullett, A. M. (2022) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-04968-2_4 · Cited by 1
How do psychology researchers interpret the results of multiple replication studies?
van den Akker, O. R., Wicherts, J. M., Alvarez, L. D., Bakker, M., & van Assen, M. A. L. M. (2023) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/s13423-022-02235-5 · Cited by 1
Research on Research: A Meta-Scientific Study of Problems and Solutions in Psychological SciencePreprint
Nuijten, M. B. (2018) · PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/qtk7e · Cited by 1
It's time! 10 + 1 reasons we should start replicating simulation studiesPreprint
Lohmann, A., Astivia, O. L. O., Morris, T. P., & Groenwold, R. H. H. (2021) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/agsnt · Cited by 1
Gibson, S. (2019) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108367943.010 · Cited by 1
Open Science in the Field of Emotional and Behavioral DisordersPreprint
Cook, B. G., Lloyd, J. W., & Therrien, W. J. (2019) · EdArXiv (OSF Preprints) · doi:10.35542/osf.io/duvf8 · Cited by 1
Proposal to NSF 19-565 to Create a STEM Education Research HubPreprint
Nosek, B. A., Ofiesh, L., Grasty, F. L., Pfeiffer, N., Mellor, D. T., Brooks, R. E., Benjamin, M., Booth, A., Bowman, S. D., Davis, J. C., et al. (2019) · MetArXiv (OSF Preprints) · doi:10.31222/osf.io/4mpuc · Cited by 2
Incentivizing Transparency in Psychological Science: Enter ScienpostingPreprint
Gullo, M., & O'Gorman, J. G. (2013) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.2258209
Innovation Strategies of Small and Medium-Sized Central North Carolina Discount Retailers
Okonkwo, G. O. (2016) · ScholarWorks (Walden University)
Preprint of Too good to be false: Nonsignificant results revisitedPreprint
Hartgerink, C. H. J., Wicherts, J. M., & van Assen, M. A. L. M. (2016) · OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) · doi:10.31219/osf.io/rkumy
Siddaway, A. P. (2017) · Stirling Online Research Repository (University of Stirling)
Deep Impact: Unintended consequences of journal rank
Brembs, B., Button, K. S., & Munafo, M. R. (2013) · University of Regensburg Publication Server (University of Regensburg) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1301.3748
The Potential Dual Moderation of Sex and Sexual Orientation on the Experience of Jealousy
West, J. (2019) · Carolina Digital Repository (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) · doi:10.17615/xrfw-nr40
Beyond Rationality: Antifoundationalism, and the Logic of Identity in Policy-Making
Bullard, A. R. (2018) · White Rose eTheses Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York)
Instructing jurors on detecting deception: is the jury still out?
Woskett, J. (2020) · Own your potential (DEAKIN)
Gibson, S. (2019) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108367943.003
Bustos, C., Canihuante, N. Z., Salcedo, P., & Mújica, A. D. (2020) · Psykhe (Santiago) · doi:10.7764/psykhe.29.2.1498 · Cited by 4
Zhang, L., Yan, M., Takashima, K., Guo, W., & Yamada, Y. (2020) · JMIR Research Protocols · doi:10.2196/24136
A Few Case Studies of QRP-Driven Irreproducible Results
Bausell, R. B. (2021) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197536537.003.0005
Gibson, S. (2019) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108367943.002
Gibson, S. (2019) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108367943.004
From Passive Agents to Active Rhetoricians
Gibson, S. (2019) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108367943.007
Questionable Research Practices and Determinants of Their FrequencyPreprint
Alsalti, T. (2021) · Thesis Commons (OSF Preprints) · doi:10.31237/osf.io/uqz2e
Wer sind die Akteure im akademischen System?
Burghardt, J. (2021) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-662-63893-4_8
Questionable Research Practices and Determinants of Their FrequencyPreprint
Alsalti, T. (2021) · Thesis Commons (OSF Preprints) · doi:10.31237/osf.io/mjvwu
From Standardised Procedure to Flexible Rhetoric
Gibson, S. (2019) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108367943.005
Gibson, S. (2019) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108367943.009
Liao, T. F. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108762519.004
Gibson, S. (2019) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108367943.001
From Proximity to Argumentation
Gibson, S. (2019) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108367943.006
Elman, C., Gerring, J., & Mahoney, J. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108762519.019
Gibson, S. (2019) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108367943.011
Communicating uncertain experimental evidencePreprint
Davis, A., Davis, A. L., & Fischhoff, B. (2018) · PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/7d3g9
[PhD Dissertation] Good Research PracticesPreprint
Sarafoglou, A. (2022) · PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/7aj5h
Legal psychological studies into child sexual abuse investigation in Indonesia
Sumampouw, N. E. J. (2023) · doi:10.26481/dis.20230316ns
The multiversal methodology as a remedy of the replication crisisPreprint
Cantone, G. G. (2023) · doi:10.31222/osf.io/kuhmz
Assessing QRPs and RRPs in Psychology Masters’ ThesesPreprint
Augusteijn, H. E. M., van Assen, M. A. L. M., Sijtsma, K., & Wicherts, J. M. (2023) · doi:10.31219/osf.io/cwyk8
Hypothetical nudges provide directional but noisy estimates of real behavior changePreprint
Gandhi, L., Kiyawat, A., Camerer, C. F., & Watts, D. J. (2023) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/c7mkf
Tourlakis, M. E. (2024) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-817218-6.00015-2
Current status and future development in the Japanese Journal of Psychology
Nakamura, T. (2024) · The Japanese journal of psychology · doi:10.4992/jjpsy.advpub_94.editorial
Ethical Issues in Psychological Science
Crandall, C., Giner‐Sorolla, R., & Biernat, M. (2024) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781009170123.003
Self-citationMitä toistettavuuskriisistä pitäisi ajatella? Kymmenen suomalaistutkijaa sähköpostihaastattelussa
Heino, M., Ilmarinen, V., Leikas, S., Lipsanen, J. O., Lönnqvist, J., Olkkonen, M., Palosaari, E. J., Renvik, T. A., Saurio, K. J., & Silfver-Kuhalampi, M. (2025) · Psykologia · doi:10.62443/psykologia.v54i6.143375
Why psychopathy might be present and prosperous in present-day psychological sciencePreprint
Aarts, A. A. (2025) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5166553
Scientists’ reputations are based on getting it right, not being rightPreprint
Axt, J., Nosek, B. A., & Ebersole, C. R. (2019) · OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints)
Assessing Questionable and Responsible Research Practices in Psychology Master’s Theses
Augusteijn, H. E. M., van Assen, M. A. L. M., Sijtsma, K., & Wicherts, J. M. (2026) · Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.3390/bs16010110
An interaction Continuum for 3D Dataset Visualization
Besançon, L. (2017) · doi:10.70675/2c660626z06afz457fzad61z7c742a806c56 · Cited by 5
Why aren’t we publishing more? The narrative bottleneck in evolutionary biology
Gossmann, T. I. (2026) · BioScience · doi:10.1093/biosci/biag055
SSLA expands its commitment to open science: Introducing Data Reports and Registered Reports
Plonsky, L., & McManus, K. (2026) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263126101909
Augusteijn, H. E. M., Wicherts, J. M., Sijtsma, K., & van Assen, M. A. L. M. (2026) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0355938 · Cited by 4
Metadata
- Authors
- Giner-Sorolla, R.
- Affiliations
- University of Kent, United Kingdom
- Venue
- Perspectives on Psychological Science
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2012-11
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 562-571
- ISSN
- 1745-6916 (ISSN-L)
- 1745-6924
- OpenAlex
- W2125515636
- Cited by
- 274
- References
- 70
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 40 · 2019: 40 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 5
- FWCI
- 23.99
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Perspectives on Psychological Science (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Kent Academic Repository (University of Kent) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Psychology Research and Bibliometrics
- Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › Academic Publishing and Open Access
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Keywords
- publication bias, replication, scientific fraud, false positives, statistical significance thresholds, information economics, open science, research integrity
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
