Academic Publications


Research that concerns scientific practice itself, including everything from scientific integrity to research methodology.

Ayorech, Z., Selzman, S., Smith-Woolley, E., Knopik, V., Neiderhiser, J., DeFries, J., Plomin, R. (2016). Publication Trends Over 55 Years of Behavioral Genetic Research. Behavior Genetics, 46, (5), 603-607.

Azoulay, P., Furman, J. L., Krieger, J. L., & Murray, F. (2014). Retractions. Review of Economics and Statistics, (0).

Baerlocher, M. O., O’Brien, J., Newton, M., Gautam, T., & Noble, J. (2010). Data integrity, reliability and fraud in medical research. European Journal of Internal Medicine21(1), 40-45.

Baker, J. P. (2003). The pertussis vaccine controversy in Great Britain, 1974–1986. Vaccine21(25), 4003-4010.

Ballietti, S., Goldstone, R., Helbing, D. (2016). Peer Review and Competition in the Art Exhibition Game. National Academy of Sciences. 113, (30), 8414-8419.

Bandyopadhyay, P., Bennett, J., Higgs, M. (2014). How to Undermine Underdetermination? Foundation of Science 20, (2), 107-127.

Banglawala, S. M., Lawrence, L. A., Franko-Tobin, E., Soler, Z. M., Schlosser, R. J., & Ioannidis, J. (2014). Recent Randomized Controlled Trials in Otolaryngology. Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, 0194599814563518.

Baribault, B., Donkin, C., Little, D., Trueblood, J. Oravecz, Z., Ravenzwaaij, D. (2018). National Academy of Sciences

Baumgardner, M. H., Greenwald, A. G., Leippe, M. R., Pratkanis, A. R. (1986).
Under What Conditions Does Theory Obstruct Research Progress?Psychological Review 93,(2), 216-229.

Beginning, O. (2004). Managing allegations of scientific misconduct and fraud: lessons from the “Hall affair”. The Medical Journal of Australia180(4), 149-151.

Begley, C.G., Ioannidis, J.P. (2015). Reproducibility in Science: Improving the Standard for Basic and Preclinical Research American Heart Association 116, (1), 116-126.

Benjamin, D.J., Berger, J.O., Johannesson, M., Nosek, B.A., Wagenmakers, E.-J., Berk, R… Johnson, V.E. (2018). Redefine Statistical SignificanceNature Human Behaviour 2, 6-10.

Bes-Rastrollo, M., Schulze, M.B., Ruiz-Canela, M., Martinez-Gonzalez, M.A. (2013). Financial conflicts of interest and reporting bias regarding the association between sugar-sweetened beverages and weight gain: A systematic review of systematic reviews. PLoS Medicine, 10(12), doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001578.

Bless, H., Burger, A.M. (2016). A Closer Look at Social Psychologists’ Silver Bullet: Inevitable and Evitable Side Effects of the Experimental Approach. Perspectives on Psychological Science 11,(2), 296-308.

Bonetta, L. (2006). The aftermath of scientific fraud. Cell124(5), 873-875.

Braxton, J. M., & Bayer, A. E. (1996). Personal experiences of research misconduct and the response of individual academic scientists. Science, Technology & Human values21(2), 198-213.

Brown, A. W., Ioannidis, J. P., Cope, M. B., Bier, D. M., & Allison, D. B. (2014). Unscientific Beliefs about Scientific Topics in Nutrition. Advances in Nutrition: An International Review Journal, 5(5), 563-565.

Budd, J. M., Sievert, M., Schultz, T. R., & Scoville, C. (1999). Effects of article retraction on citation and practice in medicine. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association87(4), 437.

Button, K.S., Ioannidis, J.P., Mokrysz, C., Nosek, B.A., Flint, J., Robinson, E.S., Munafo, M.R. (2013). Power Failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience. Nature Reviews Neuroscience , 14, 365-376.

Callaham, M. L., Wears, R. L., Weber, E. J., Barton, C., & Young, G. (1998). Positive-outcome bias and other limitations in the outcome of research abstracts submitted to a scientific meeting. JAMA280(3), 254-257.

Causadias, J. M., Vitriol, J. A., & Atkin, A. L. (2018). Do we overemphasize the role of culture in the behavior of racial/ethnic minorities? Evidence of a cultural (mis)attribution bias in American psychology. American Psychologist, 73,(3), 243-255.

Chalmers, I., & Dickersin, K. (2013). Biased under-reporting of research reflects biased under-submission more than biased editorial rejection. F1000Research2.

Chandler, J., Paolacci, G., Peer, E., Mueller, P., Ratliff, K. A. (2015). Using Nonnaive Participants Can Reduce Effect Sizes. Psychological Science, 26,(7), 1131-1139.

Chavalarias, D., Wallach, J. D., Li, A. H., Ioannidis, J. P. (2016). Evolution of Reporting P Values in the Biomedical Literature, 1990-2015. JAMA , 315,(11), 1141-1148.

Chen, R., Desai, N. R., Ross, J.S., Zhang W., Chau, K. H., Wayda, B… Krumholz, H. M. (2016). Publication and reporting of clinical trial results: cross sectional analysis across academic medical centers. BMJ , 352,(637).

Christie, B. (1999). Panel needed to combat research fraud. BMJ: British Medical Journal319(7219), 1222.

Clark, S. E., Moreland, M. B., & Gronlund, S. D. (2014). Evolution of the empirical and theoretical foundations of eyewitness identification reform.  target=”_blank”Psychonomic Bulletin & Review21(2), 251-267.

Clauset, A., Larremore, D. B., Sinatra, R. (2017). Data-driven predictions in the science of science. Science , 355,(6324), 477-480.

Colombo, M., Bucher, L., Inbar, Y. (2016). Explanatory Judgment, Moral Offense and Value-Free Science. Review of Philosophy and Psychology , 7,(4), 743-763.

Colquhoun, D. (2014). An investigation of the false discovery rate and the misinterpretation of p-values. R. Soc. open. Sci., 1,(140216).

Cohen-Kohler, J. C., & Esmail, L. C. (2007). Scientific misconduct, the pharmaceutical industry, and the tragedy of institutions. Medicine and Law26(3), 431.

Cokol, M., Iossifov, I., Rodriguez‐Esteban, R., & Rzhetsky, A. (2007). How many scientific papers should be retracted?. EMBO Reports8(5), 422-423.

Consoli, L. (2006). Scientific misconduct and science ethics: a case study based approach. Science and Engineering Ethics12(3), 533-541.

Cook, D. J., Guyatt, G. H., Ryan, G., Clifton, J., Buckingham, L., Willan, A., … & Oxman, A. D. (1993). Should unpublished data be included in meta-analyses?: Current convictions and controversies. JAMA269(21), 2749-2753.

Cooper, H., & Dent, A. (2011). Ethical issues in the conduct and reporting of meta-analysis. In A. T. Panter, & S. K. Sterba (Eds.), Handbook of ethics in quantitative methodology; handbook of ethics in quantitative methodology (pp. 417-443, Chapter xix, 519 Pages) Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group, New York, NY. 

Coyne, J. C. (2016). Replication initiatives will not salvage the trustworthiness of psychology. BMC Psychology, 4,(28), 1-19.

Cunningham, M. R., Baumeister, R. F. (2016). How to Make Nothing Out of Something: Analyses of the Impact of Study Sampling and Statistical Interpretation in Misleading Meta-Analytic Conclusions. Frontiers in Psychology, 7,(1639).

Dahlberg, J. E., & Mahler, C. C. (2006). The Poehlman case: running away from the truth. Science and Engineering Ethics12(1), 157-173.

Dalton, R. (2001). Private investigations. Nature411(6834), 129-130.

David, S. P., Ware, J. J., Chu, I. M., Loftus, P. D., Fusar-Poli, P., Radua, J… Ioannidis, J. P. (2013). Potential Reporting Bias in fMRI Studies of the Brain. PLoS ONE , 8,(7), e70104.

Davis, P. M. (2012). The persistence of error: a study of retracted articles on the Internet and in personal libraries. Journal of the Medical Library Association: JMLA100(3), 184.

Dijksterhuis, A. (2014). Welcome Back Theory! Perspectives on Psychological Science9(1), 72-75.

Dreber, A., Pfeiffer, T., Almenberg, J., Isaksson, S., Wilson, B., Chen, Y… Johannesson, M. (2015). Using prediction markets to estimate the reproducibility of scientific research. PNAS , 112,(50), 15343-15347.

Dyer, C. (1998). Doctor admits research fraud. BMJ316(7132), 645.

Dyer, O. (2003). GMC reprimands doctor for research fraud. BMJ: British Medical Journal326(7392), 730.

Earp, B. D., Trafimow, D. (2015). Replication, falsification, and the crisis of confidence in social psychology. Front. Psychol. 6,(621).

Earp, B. D. (2016). Open review of the draft paper entitled, “Replication initiatives will not salvage the trustworthiness of psychology” by James C. Coyne. BMC Psychology .

Ebrahim, S., Sohani, Z. N., Montoya, L., Agarwal, A., Thorlund, K., Mills, E. J., & Ioannidis, J. P. (2014). Reanalyses of randomized clinical trial data. JAMA312(10), 1024-1032.

Enders, W., & Hoover, G.A. (2004). Whose line is it? Plagiarism in economics. Journal of Economic Literature, 42, 487-493.

Enders, W., & Hoover, G. (2006). Plagiarism in the economics profession: A survey. Challenge, 49(5), 92-107.

Epstein, W. M. (2004). Confirmational Response Bias and the Quality of the Editorial Processes Among American Social Work Journals. Sage Publications , 14,(6), 450-458.

Etz, A., Vandekerckhove, J. (2016). A Bayesian Perspective on the Reproducibility Project: Psychology. PLoS ONE , 11,(2), e0149794.

Fair, J. E. (1988). A meta-research case study of developmental journalism. Journalism Quarterly, 65(1), 165.

Fanelli, D., Costas, R., Lariviere, V. (2015). Misconduct Policies, Academic Culture and Career Stage, Not Gender or Pressures to Publish, Affect Scientific Integrity. PLoS ONE 10,(6), e0127556.

Fanelli, D., Costas, R., Ioannidis, J. P. (2017). Meta-assessment of bias in science. PNAS 114,(14), 3714-3719.

Fanelli, D. (2009). How many scientists fabricate and falsify research? A systematic review and meta-analysis of survey data. PloS One4(5), e5738.

Fanelli, D. (2013). Why growing retractions are (mostly) a good sign. PLoS Medicine10(12), e1001563.

Fang, F. C., Bennett, J. W., & Casadevall, A. (2013). Males are overrepresented among life science researchers committing scientific misconduct. MBio4(1), e00640-12.

Fang, F. C., & Casadevall, A. (2011). Retracted science and the retraction index. Infection and Immunity79(10), 3855-3859.

Fiore, S. M. (2016). SciTS 101: Fundamentals of the Science of Team Science.  Conference Workshop.

Flaherty, D. K. (2011). The vaccine-autism connection: a public health crisis caused by unethical medical practices and fraudulent science. Annals of Pharmacotherapy45(10), 1302-1304.

Fortunato, S., Bergstrom, C. T., Börner, K., Evans, J. A., Helbing, D., Milojevié, S… Barabási, A. L. (2018). Science of science. Science359.

Frances, G. (2011). Follow the argument where it leads: Simonsohn’s criticisms on publication bias critiques are unfounded. Department of Psychological Sciences.

Francis, G. (2014). The frequency of excess success for articles in Psychological Science. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review21(5), 1180-1187.

Franco, A., Malhotra, N., Simonovits, G. (2016). Underreporting in Psychology Experiments: Evidence From a Study Registry. Social Psychology and Personality Science 7,(1), 8-12.

Freedman, L.P., Cockburn, I.M., & Simcoe, T.S. (2015). The Economics of Reproducibility in Preclinical Research. PLoS Biology, 13(6), 1-9.

Freedman, L. P., Cockburn, I. M., Simcoe, T. S. (2015). The Economics of Reproducibility in Preclinical Research. PLoS Biol 13,(6), e1002165.

Fuchs, H. M., Jenny, M., & Fiedler, S. (2012). Psychologists are open to change, yet wary of rules. Perspectives on Psychological Science7(6), 639-642.

Furman, J. L., Jensen, K., & Murray, F. (2012). Governing knowledge in the scientific community: Exploring the role of retractions in biomedicine. Research Policy41(2), 276-290.

Fusar‐Poli, P., Radua, J., Frascarelli, M., Mechelli, A., Borgwardt, S., Fabio, F., … & David, S. P. (2014). Evidence of reporting biases in voxel‐based morphometry (VBM) studies of psychiatric and neurological disorders. Human Brain Mapping35(7), 3052-3065.

Gall, T., Ioannidis, J. P., Maniadis, Z. (2017). The credibility crisis in research: Can economics tools help? PLoS Biol 15,(4), e2001846.

Gardner, W., Lidz, C. W., & Hartwig, K. C. (2005). Authors’ reports about research integrity problems in clinical trials. Contemporary Clinical Trials26(2), 244-251.

Gelman, A., & Basbøll, T. (2014). When do stories work? Evidence and illustration in the social sciences. Sociological Methods & Research, 0049124114526377.

Gibelman, M., & Gelman, S. R. (2005). Scientific misconduct in social welfare research: Preventive lessons from other fields. Social Work Education24(3), 275-295.

Gilbert, D. T., King, G., Pettigrew, S., Wilson, T. D. (2016). Comment on “Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science.” Science 351,(6277), 1037.

Godau, C., Vogelgesang, T., Gaschler, R. (2016). Perception of bar graphs e A biased impression? Elsevier 359, 67-73.

Gottweis, H., & Triendl, R. (2006). South Korean policy failure and the Hwang debacle. Nature Biotechnology24(2), 141-143.

Gregg, A. P., Mahadevan, N., Sedikides, C. (2016). The SPOT Effect: People Spontaneously Prefer their Own Theories. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 70,(6), 996-1010.

Greitemeyer, T. (2014). Article retracted, but the message lives on. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 21,(2), 557-561.

Grieneisen, M. L., & Zhang, M. (2012). A comprehensive survey of retracted articles from the scholarly literature. PLoS One7(10), e44118.

Guay, B., Davis, Z., DeLaunay, M., Charlesworth, A. (2014). Number Comprehension Impacts Political Judgments. Unpublished Draft.

Guernsey, L. (2014). Garbled in Translation: Getting Media Research to the Press and Public. Journal of Children and Media, 8(1), 87-94.

Gupta, A. (2013). Fraud and misconduct in clinical research: A concern. Perspectives in Clinical Research4(2), 144.

Gupta, N., & Stopfer, M. (2011). Negative results need airing too. Nature470(7332), 39-39.

Haidich, A. B., Pilalas, D., Contopoulos-Ioannidis, D. G., & Ioannidis, J. P. (2013). Most meta-analyses of drug interventions have narrow scopes and many focus on specific agents. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology66(4), 371-378.

Harriman, S. L., Patel, J. (2016). When are clinical trials registered? An analysis of prospective versus retrospective registration. Trials, 17,(187).

Healy, N. D. B. (1990). HHS: Gallo guilty of misconduct. Science22, 1499.

Heeren, A., Mogoașe, C., Philippot, P., & McNally, R. J. (2015). Attention bias modification for social anxiety: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clinical Psychology Review, 40, 76-90.

Hicks, D., Wouters, P., Waltman, L., Rijcke, S., Rafols, I. (2015). The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics. Macmillan Publishers Limited , 520, 429-431.

Holman, L., Head, M. L., Lanfear, R., Jennions, M. D. (2015). Evidence of Experimental Bias in the Life Sciences: Why We Need Blind Data Recording. PLoS Biol , 13,(7), e1002190.

Hopkins, E. J., Weisberg, D. S., Taylor, J. C. (2016). The seductive allure is a reductive allure: People prefer scientific explanations that contain logically irrelevant reductive information. Elsevier , 155, 67-76.

Howard, D. H., David, G., Hockenberry, J. (2016). Selective Hearing: Physician-Ownership and Physicians’ Response to New Evidence. Nber Working Paper Series .

Hunter, J. P., Saratzis, A., Sutton, A. J., Boucher, R. H., Sayers, R. D., & Bown, M. J. (2014). In meta-analyses of proportion studies, funnel plots were found to be an inaccurate method of assessing publication bias. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 67(8), 897-903.

Ioannidis, J. P. (2015). A generalized view of self-citation: Direct, co-author, collaborative, and coercive induced self-citation. Journal of Psychosomatic Research78(1), 7-11.

Ioannidis, J. P. (2011). Excess significance bias in the literature on brain volume abnormalities. Archives of General Psychiatry68(8), 773-780.

Ioannidis, J. P. (2013). Implausible results in human nutrition research. BMJ347.

Ioannidis, J. P. (2013). Informed consent, big data, and the oxymoron of research that is not research. The American Journal of Bioethics13(4), 40-42.

Ioannidis, J. P. (2013). To Replicate or Not to Replicate: The Case of Pharmacogenetic Studies Have Pharmacogenomics Failed, or Do They Just Need Larger-Scale Evidence and More Replication?. Circulation: Cardiovascular Genetics6(4), 413-418.

Ioannidis, J. P. (2008). Why most discovered true associations are inflated. Epidemiology19(5), 640-648.

Ioannidis J.P.A. (2005). Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Med 2(8): e124.

Ioannidis, J.P.A. (2012).  Why science is not necessarily self-correcting.  Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 645-654.

Ioannidis, JPA., Fanelli, D., Dunne, D. D., Goodman, S. N. (2015). Meta-research: Evaluation and Improvement of Research Methods and Practices. PLoS Biol, 13, (10), e10002264.

Ioannidis, J. P., Khoury, M. J.(2014). Assessing Value in Biomedical Research: The PQRST of Appraisal and Reward. JAMA , 312, (5), 483-484.

Ioannidis, J. P., Tarone, R., McLaughlin, J. K. (2011). The False-positive to False-negative Ratio in Epidemiologic Studies. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins , 22, (4), 450-456.

Ioannidis, J. P., Munafo, M. R., Fusar-Poli, P., Nosek, B. A., David, S. P. (2014). Publication and other reporting biases in cognitive sciences: detection, prevalence and prevention. Trends Cogn Sci. , Author Manuscript.

Ioannidis, J. P. (2012). Why Science Is Not Necessarily Self-Correcting. Perspectives on Psychological Science , 7, (6), 645-654.

Iqbal, S. A., Wallach, J. D., Khoury, M. J., Schully, S. D., Ioannidis, J. P. (2016). Reproducible Research Practices and
Transparency across the Biomedical
Literature. PLoS Biol , 14, (1), e1002333.

Johnson, V. E., Payne, R., Wang, T., Asher, A., Mandal, S. (2017). On the reproducibility of psychological science. American Statistical Association , 112, (517), 1-10.

John, L. K., Loewenstein, G., & Prelec, D. (2012). Measuring the prevalence of questionable research practices with incentives for truth telling. Psychological Science, 0956797611430953.

Kahan, D. M., Peters, E., Dawson, E., Slovic, P. (2017). Motivated Numeracy and Enlightened Self-Government. Behavioural Public Policy 1, (1), 54-86.

Kaiser, J. (2015). The Cancer Test: A nonprofit’s effort to replicate 50 top cancer papers is shaking up labs. AAAS 348, (6242), 1411-1413.

Kandela, I., Aird, F. (2017). Replication Study: Discovery and preclinical validation of drug indications using compendia of public gene expression data. eLife 6.

Kao, S.F., Wasserman, E. (1993). Assessment of an Information Integretation Account of Contingency Judgment With Examination of Subjective Cell Importance and Method of Information Presentation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 19, 1363-1386.

Kaplan, R. M., Irvin, V. L. (2015). Likelihood of Null Effects of Large NHLBI Clinical Trials Has Increased over Time. PLoS ONE 10, (8), e0132382.

Kassin, S. M., Ellsworth, P. C., Smith, V. L. (1989). The “General Acceptance” of Psychological Research on Eyewitness Testimony. American Psychologist 44, (8), 1089-1098.

Kintisch, E. (2005). Scientific misconduct. Researcher faces prison for fraud in NIH grant applications and papers. Science307(5717), 1851-1851.

Klein, O., Doyen, S., Leys, C., Miller, S., Questienne, L., & Cleeremans, A. (2012). Low hopes, high expectations expectancy effects and the replicability of behavioral experiments. Perspectives on Psychological Science7(6), 572-584.

Ke, Q., Ferrara, E., Radicchi, F., Flammini, A. (2015). Defining and identifying Sleeping Beauties in science. PNAS 112, (24), 7426-7431.

Khamis, A. M., Moheb, M. E., Nicolas, J., Iskandarani, G., Refaat, M. M., & Akl, E. A. (2019). Several reasons explained the variation in the results of 22 meta-analyses addressing the same question. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 113, 147-158.

Klien, M., Broadwell, P., Farb, S., Grappone, T. (2016). Comparing Published Scientific Journal Articles to Their Pre-print Versions. JCDL .

Kornbrot, D. E., Wiseman, R., Georgiou, G. J. (2018). Quality science from quality measurement: The role of measurement type with respect to replication and effect size magnitude in psychological research. PLoS ONE 13, (2), e0192808.

Korpela, K. M. (2010). How long does it take for the scientific literature to purge itself of fraudulent material?: the Breuning case revisited. Current Medical Research & Opinion26(4), 843-847.

Kranke, P. (2005). Review of publication bias in studies on publication bias: Meta-research on publication bias does not help transfer research results to patient care. BMJ : British Medical Journal, 331(7517), 638.

Kuklinski, J. H., Quirk, P. J., Jerit, J., Schweider, D., Rich, R. (2018). Misinformation and the Currency of Democratic Citizenship. The Journal of Politics 62, (3), 790-816.

Kurzman, C., Schanzer, D., Moosa, E. (2011). Muslim American Terrorism Since 9/11: Why So Rare? The Muslim World 101, (3), 464-483.

Kurzban, R. (2010). Does the Brain Consume Additional Glucose During Self-Control Tasks? Evolutionary Psychology 8,(2), 244-259.

Kyzas, P. A., Loizou, K. T., & Ioannidis, J. P. (2005). Selective reporting biases in cancer prognostic factor studies. Journal of the National Cancer Institute97(14), 1043-1055.

Lakes, D. (2014). Why Psychologists Should Ignore Recommendations to Use α < .001. The 20% Statistician .

Lancee, M., Lemmens, CMC., Kahn, R. S., Vinkers, C. H., Luykx, J. J. (2017). Outcome reporting bias in randomized-controlled trials investigating antipsychotic drugs. Translational Psychiatry , 7.

Lane, A., Luminet, O., Nave, G. (2016). Possible file drawer problem in behavioral OT research. Journal of Neuroendocrinology , 28, (4).

Lau, J., Ioannidis, J. P., Terrin, N., Schmid, C., Olkin, I. (2006). The case of the misleading funnel plot. BMJ , 333, 597-600.

Lazerfeld, P. (1949). The American Soldier, An Expository Review. The Public Opinion Quarterly , 13, (3), 377-404.

Lewandowsky, S., Oberauer, K. (2016). Motivated Rejection of Science. Current Directions in Psychological Science , 25, (4), 217-222.

Liew, S. X., Howe, P. D., Little, D. R. (2016). The appropriacy of averaging in the study of context effect. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review , 23, (5), 1639-1646.

List, J.A., Bailey, C.D., Euzent, P.J., & Martin, T.L. (2001). Academic economists behaving badly? A survey on three areas of unethical behavior. Economic Inquiry, 39(1), 162-170.

Loftus, G. R. (1996). Psychology will be a much better science when we change the way we analyze data. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 161-171.

Lui, B. S. (2017). Knowledge, attitudes, and biased evaluation of science: Testing the expertise paradox.List, J.A., Bailey, C.D., Euzent, P.J., & Martin, T.L. (2001). Academic economists behaving badly? A survey on three areas of unethical behavior. Economic Inquiry, 39(1), 162-170.

Lynöe, N., Jacobsson, L., & Lundgren, E. (1999). Fraud, misconduct or normal science in medical research–an empirical study of demarcation. Journal of Medical Ethics25(6), 501-506.

MacCoun, R. J. (1998). Biasesin the Interpretation and Uses of Research Results. Annual Review of Psychology , 49, 259-287.

Madlock-Brown, C. R., & Eichmann, D. (2014). The (lack of) Impact of Retraction on Citation Networks. Science and Engineering Ethics21(1), 127-137.

Mahoney, M. (1977). Publication Prejudices: An Experimental Study of Confirmatory Bias in the Peer Review System. Cognitive Therapy and Research , 1, (2), 161-175.

Mann, A. (2016). Prediction markets
can be uncannily accurate — sometimes. Scientists have begun to understand why they work, and how they can fail.. Nature , 538, 308-310.

Marshall, E. (1998). Medline searches turn up cases of suspected plagiarism. Science279(5350), 473-474.

Marusic, M. (2008). The Kurjak plagiarism case: Scientific misconduct in Croatia. BMJ: British Medical Journal336(7637), 173.

Matthews, R. (2000). Storks Deliver Babies (p = 0.008). Teaching Statistics22(2), 36-38.

Maul, A. (2017). Rethinking Traditional Methods of Survey Validation. Measurement, Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives. , 15, (2), 51-69.

Mello MM, Cohen I. Clinical Trials and the Right to Remain Silent. JAMA Intern Med.2014;174(9):1505-1506.

Michalek, A. M., Hutson, A. D., Wicher, C. P., & Trump, D. L. (2010). The costs and underappreciated consequences of research misconduct: a case study. PLoS Medicine7(8), e1000318.

Monsarrat, P., Vergnes, J. N. (2018). The intriguing evolution of effect sizes in biomedical research over time: smaller but more often statistically signi cant. GigaScience. , 7, 1-10.

Morey, R. (2013). The consistency test does not–and cannot–deliver what is advertised: A comment on Francis. Journal of Mathematical Psychology , 57, (5).

Mullinix, K., Leeper, T. J., Druckman, J. N., Freese, J. (2016). The Generalizability of Survey Experiments*. Journal of Experimental Political Science, 2, (2), 109-138.

Mullinix, K., Druckman, J. N., Freese, J. (2016). Go forth and replicate! Nature, 536, 373.

Mundt, L. A. (2008). Perceptions of scientific misconduct among graduate allied health students relative to ethics education and gender. Journal of Allied Health37(4), 221-221.

Naci, H., & Ioannidis, J. P. (2015). How Good Is “Evidence” from Clinical Studies of Drug Effects and Why Might Such Evidence Fail in the Prediction of the Clinical Utility of Drugs?. Annual Review of Pharmacology and Toxicology55, 169-189.

Nath, S. B., Marcus, S. C., & Druss, B. G. (2006). Retractions in the research literature: misconduct or mistakes?. Medical Journal of Australia185(3), 152.

Nauroth, P., Gollwitzer, M., Bender, J., Rothmund, T. (2013). Gamers against Science: The Case of the Violent Video Games Debate. European Journal on Social Psychology, 44, (2).

Neale, A. V., Dailey, R. K., & Abrams, J. (2010). Analysis of citations to biomedical articles affected by scientific misconduct. Science and Engineering Ethics16(2), 251-261.

Necker, S. (2014). Scientific misbehavior in economics. Research Policy, 43(10), 1747-1759.

Necker, S. (2016). Scientific misbehavior in economics. Elsevier, 43, (10), 1747-1759.

Nelson, L. D., & Simmons, J. P. (2007). Moniker maladies when names sabotage success. Psychological Science18(12), 1106-1112.

Nicholson, J. M., & Ioannidis, J. P. (2012). Research grants: Conform and be funded. Nature, 492(7427), 34-36.

Nissen, S. B., Magidson, T., Gross, K., Bergstrom, C. T. (2016). Publication bias and the canonization of false facts. eLife , 5, e21451.

Nosek, B. A., Alter, G., Banks, G. C., Borsboom, D., Bowman, S. D., Breckler, S. J… Yarkoni, T. (2015). Promoting an open research culture. Science, 348, (6242), 1422-1425.

Nowbar, A.N., Mielewczik, M. Karavassilis, M., Dehbi, H. Shun-Shin, M.J., Jones, S., … & Francis, D.P. (2014). Discrepancies in autologous bone marrow stem cell trials and enhancement of ejection fraction (DAMASCENE): Weighted regression and meta-analysis. The BMJ, 348. doi:

Nowbar, A. N., Mielewczik, M., Karavassilis, M., Dehbi, HM., Shun-Shin, M. J., Jones, S… Francis, D. P.(2014). Discrepancies in autologous bone marrow stem cell trials and enhancement of ejection fraction (DAMASCENE): weighted regression and meta-analysis. BMJ , 348.

Nyham, B., Reifler, J. (2010). When Corrections Fail: The Persistence of Political Misperceptions. Political Behavior , 32, (62), 303-330.

O’Boyle, E. H., Banks, G. C., & Gonzalez-Mulé, E. (2014). The Chrysalis Effect How Ugly Initial Results Metamorphosize Into Beautiful Articles. Journal of Management, 0149206314527133.

O’Hara, B. (2011). Negative results are published. Nature471(7339), 448-449.

Okonta, P., & Rossouw, T. (2013). Prevalence of scientific misconduct among a group of researchers in Nigeria. Developing World Bioethics13(3), 149-157.

Oksvold, M. P. (2016). Incidence of Data Duplications in a Randomly Selected Pool of Life Science Publications. Science and Engineering Ethics, 22, (2), 487-496.

Oksvold, M.P. (2015). Incidence of data duplications in a randomly selected pool of life science publications. Science and Engineering Ethics, 1-10.

Papatheodorou, S. I., Tsilidis, K. K., Evangelou, E., & Ioannidis, J. P. (2015). Application of credibility ceilings probes the robustness of meta-analyses of biomarkers and cancer risk. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology68(2), 163-174.

Parrish, D. M. (2004). Scientific misconduct and findings against graduate and medical students. Science and Engineering Ethics10(3), 483-491.

Peters, GJ. Y. (2017). Why most experiments in psychology failed: sample sizes required for randomization to generate equivalent groups as a partial solution to the replication crisis. DEpartment of Work and Psychology .

Peterson, D. (2016). The Baby Factory: Difficult Research Objects, Disciplinary Standards, and the Production of Statistical Significance. Socius: Sociological Reserach for a Dynamic World2, 1-10.

Pfeiffer, T., Bertram, L., & Ioannidis, J. P. (2011). Quantifying selective reporting and the Proteus phenomenon for multiple datasets with similar bias. PloS One6(3), e18362.

Portillo-Reyes, V., Pérez-Garcia, M., Loya-Meéndez, Y., Puente, A. E. (2014). Clinical significance of neuropsychological improvement after supplementation with omega-3 in 8–12 years old malnourished Mexican children: A randomized, double-blind, placebo and treatment clinical trial. Elsevier35, (4), 861-870.

Pritschet, L., Powell, D., Horne, Z. (2016). Marginally Significant Effects as Evidence for Hypotheses: Changing Attitudes Over Four Decades.Psychological Science 27, (7), 1036-1042.

Pryor, E. R., Habermann, B., & Broome, M. E. (2007). Scientific misconduct from the perspective of research coordinators: a national survey. Journal of Medical Ethics33(6), 365-369.

Pupovac, V., & Fanelli, D. (2014). Scientists Admitting to Plagiarism: A Meta-analysis of Surveys. Science and Engineering ethics, 1-22.

Redman, B. K., Yarandi, H. N., & Merz, J. F. (2008). Empirical developments in retraction. Journal of Medical Ethics34(11), 807-809.

Rennie, D. (1994). Breast cancer: how to mishandle misconduct. JAMA271(15),1205-1207.

Romesburg, C. H. (2016). How Publishing in Open Access Journals Threatens Science and What We Can Do About It. The Journal of Wildlife Management , 80, (7).

Rosenbaum, A., & Langhinrichsen-Rohling, J. (2006). Meta-research on violence and victims: The impact of data collection methods on findings and participants. Violence and Victims, 21(4), 404-9.

Rzhetsky, A., Foster, J. G., Foster, I. T., Evans, J. A. (2015). Choosing experiments to accelerate collective discovery. PNAS , 112, (47), 14569-14574.

Salomon, E. (2016). Article Level Metrics and Many Labs Replication Outcomes. ErikaSoloman.Com.

Schwartz, N. (1996). Cognition and Communication: Judgmental Biases, Research Methods, and the Logic of Conversation. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers , 1995.

Schooler, J. W. (2014). Turning the Lens of Science on Itself: Verbal Overshadowing, Replication, and Metascience. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 9(5), 579–584.

Schroter, S., Black, N., Evans, S., Godlee, F., Osorio, L., & Smith, R. (2008). What errors do peer reviewers detect, and does training improve their ability to detect them?. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine101(10), 507-514.

Scott, C. T., & Magnus, D. (2014). Wrongful termination: lessons from the Geron clinical trial. Stem Cells Translational Medicine, sctm-2014.

Sheehan, J. G. (2007). Fraud, conflict of interest, and other enforcement issues in clinical research. Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine74(Suppl 2), S63.

Silberzahn, R., Simonsohn, U., & Uhlmann, E. L. (2014). Matched-Names Analysis Reveals No Evidence of Name-Meaning Effects A Collaborative Commentary on Silberzahn and Uhlmann (2013). Psychological Science25(7), 1504-1505.

Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., & Simonsohn, U. (2011). False-positive psychology undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant. Psychological Science, 0956797611417632.

Slingsby, B. T., Kodama, S., & Akabayashi, A. (2006). Scientific misconduct in Japan: the present paucity of oversight policy. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics15(03), 294-297.

Shanaham, D. R. (2016). Auto-correlation of journal impact factor for consensus research reporting statements: a cohort study. PeerJ , 4, e1887.

Shiffrin, R. M., Börner, K., Stigler, S. M. (2018). Scientific progress despite irreproducibility: A seeming paradox. PNAS , 115, (11), 2632-2639.

Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., Simonsohn, U. (2011). False-Positive Psychology: Undisclosed Flexibility in Data Collection and Analysis Allows Presenting Anything as Significant. Psychological Science22(11), 1359-1366.

Simonsohn, U. (2012). It Does Not Follow: Evaluating the One-Off Publication Bias Critiques by Francis. Perspectives on Psychological Science , 7, (6), 597-599.

Smaldino, P. E., McElreath, R. (2016). The Natural Selection of Bad Science. The Royal Society .

Smith, J., & Godlee, F. (2005). Investigating allegations of scientific misconduct. BMJ331(7511), 245-246.

Smith, R. (2003). When to retract?: Reserve retraction for fraud and major error. BMJ: British Medical Journal327(7420), 883.

Spence, J.R., Stanley, D. J. (2016). Prediction Interval: What to Expect When You’re Expecting . . . A Replication. PLoS ONE , 11, (9), e0162874.

Steen, R. G. (2011). Retractions in the scientific literature: do authors deliberately commit research fraud?. Journal of Medical Ethics37(2), 113-117.

Steen, R. G., Casadevall, A., & Fang, F. C. (2013). Why has the number of scientific retractions increased?. PloS One8(7), e68397.

Stroebe, W., Postmes, T., & Spears, R. (2012). Scientific misconduct and the myth of self-correction in science. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(6), 670-688.

Szucs, D., Ioannidis, JP. A. (2017). Empirical assessment of published effect sizes and power in the recent cognitive neuroscience and psychology literature. PLoS Biol , 15, (3), e20000797.

Szucs, D., Ioannidis, JP. A. (2017). When Null Hypothesis Significance Testing Is Unsuitable for Research: A Reassessment. Front. Hum. Neurosci.

Thompson, N., Hanley, D. (2017). Science is Shaped by Wikipedia: Evidence From a Randomized Control Trial. MIT Sloan Research Paper No. 5238-17.

Tomkins, A., Zhang, M., Heavlin, W. D. (2017). Reviewer bias in single- versus double-blind peer review. PNAS , 114, (48), 12708-12713.

Trinquart, L., John, D. M., Galea, S. (2016). Why do we think we know what we know? A metaknowledge analysis of the salt controversy. International Journal of Epidemiology, 45, (1), 251-260.

Ueno, T., Fastrich, G. M., Murayama, K. (2016). Meta-Analysis to Integrate Effect Sizes Within an Article: Possible Misuse and Type I Error Inflation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 145, (5), 643-654.

Vadillo, M. A., Gold, N., Osman, M. (2016). The Bitter Truth About Sugar and Willpower: The Limited Evidential Value of the Glucose Model of Ego Depletion. Psychological Science.

Van Bavel, J. J., Mende-Siedlecki, P., Brady, W. J., Reinero, D. A. (2016). Contextual sensitivity in scientific reproducibility. PNAS , 113, (23), 6454-6459.

Wager, E. (2007). What do journal editors do when they suspect research misconduct?. Medicine and Law26(3), 535-544.

Wager, E., & Williams, P. (2011). Why and how do journals retract articles? An analysis of Medline retractions 1988–2008. Journal of Medical Ethics37(9), 567-570.

Wagenmakers, E. J., Wetzels, R., Borsboom, D., & Van Der Maas, H. L. (2011). Why psychologists must change the way they analyze their data: the case of psi: comment on Bem (2011). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol 100(3), 426-432

Wang, M. Q., Yan, A. F., & Katz, R. V. (2018). Researcher Requests for Inappropriate Analysis and Reporting: A U.S. Survey of Consulting Biostatisticians. Annals of Internal Medicine, 169(8), 554-558.

Weingarten, E., Chen, Q., McAdams, M., Yi, J., Hepler, J., Albarracin, D. (2016). On Priming Action: Conclusions from a Meta-Analysis of the Behavioral Effects of Incidentally-Presented Words. Current Opinion Psychology 12, 53-57.

Wersebe, H., Sijbrandij, M., & Cuijpers, P. (2013). Correction: Psychological group-treatments of social anxiety disorder: A meta-analysis. PLoS One, 8(12).

Westfall, J., Judd, C. M., Kenny, D. A. (2015). Replicating Studies in Which Samples of Participants Respond to Samples of Stimuli. Perspectives on Psychological Science 10, (3), 390-399.

Westfall, J., Judd, C. M., Kenny, D. A. (2015). Degrees of freedom in planning, running, analyzing, and reporting psychological studies A checklist to avoid p-hacking. Frontiers in Psychology 7, (1832).

Wicherts, J. M., Bakker, M., & Molenaar, D. (2011). Willingness to share research data is related to the strength of the evidence and the quality of reporting of statistical results. PloS One6(11), e26828.

Wicherts, J. M., & Scholten, A. Z. (2013). Comment on “Poverty impedes cognitive function”. Science342(6163), 1169-1169.

Wicherts, J. M., & Bakker, M. (2012). Publish (your data) or (let the data) perish! Why not publish your data too?. Intelligence40(2), 73-76.

Wilhite, A.W., & Fong, E.A. (2012). Coercive citation in academic publishing. Science, 335(6068), 542-543.

Wilmshurst, P. (1997). The code of silence. The Lancet349(9051), 567-569.

Winter, S., Krämer, N. C. (2015). Who’s right: The author or the audience? Effects of user comments and ratings on the perception of online science articles. The European Journal of Communication Research , 41, (3), 339-360.

Van Noorden, R. (2011). The trouble with retractions. Nature478(7367), 26-28.

Xin, H. (2006). Scandals shake Chinese science. Science312(5779), 1464-1466.

Yan-dong, Z. H. A. O. (2008). Analysis of PhD Graduates’ Attitude towards Scientific Misconduct and Its Causes [J]. China Soft Science5, 006.

Zhang, M., & Grieneisen, M. L. (2013). The impact of misconduct on the published medical and non-medical literature, and the news media.Scientometrics96(2), 573-587.

Zwaan, R. A., Pecher, D., Paolacci, G., Bouwmeester, S., Verkoeijen, P., Dijkstra, K., Zeelenberg, R. (2017). Participant Nonnaiveté and the reproducibility of cognitive psychology. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review , 1-5.