Editing Social psychology (section)

=== Replication crisis ===
{{main|Replication crisis}}
Many social psychological research findings have proven difficult to replicate, leading some to argue that social psychology is undergoing a [[replication crisis]].<ref name="OSC2015">{{cite journal|last1=Open Science Collaboration|date=2015|title=Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science|url=http://hub.hku.hk/bitstream/10722/230596/1/Content.pdf|journal=[[Science (journal)|Science]]|publisher=[[American Association for the Advancement of Science]]|volume=349|issue=6251|pages=aac4716|doi=10.1126/science.aac4716|pmid=26315443|via=HKU Scholars Hub|hdl-access=free|hdl=10722/230596|s2cid=218065162|access-date=24 April 2020|archive-date=17 April 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200417011013/http://hub.hku.hk/bitstream/10722/230596/1/Content.pdf|url-status=live}}</ref> A 2014 special edition of ''[[Social Psychology (journal)|Social Psychology]]'' focused on replication studies, finding that a number of previously held social psychological beliefs were difficult to replicate.<ref>[https://econtent.hogrefe.com/toc/zsp/45/3 ''Social Psychology'' 45(3)] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200807070256/https://econtent.hogrefe.com/toc/zsp/45/3 |date=7 August 2020 }} {{Access indicator|open}}. [[Hogrefe Publishing Group|Hogrefe Publishing]] (2014). {{ISSN|1864-9335}}.</ref> Likewise, a 2012 special edition of ''[[Perspectives on Psychological Science]]'' focused on issues ranging from publication bias to null-aversion which have contributed to the replication crisis.<ref>[https://journals.sagepub.com/toc/pps/7/6 ''Perspectives on Psychological Science'' 7(6)] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161030220951/http://pps.sagepub.com/content/7/6.toc |date=30 October 2016 }}{{Access indicator|open}}. [[Association for Psychological Science]] (2012). {{ISSN|1745-6924}}. – via [[SAGE Journals]].</ref>

Some factors have been identified in social psychological research as contributing to the crisis. For one, questionable research practices have been identified as common. Such practices, while not necessarily intentionally fraudulent, often involve converting undesired statistical outcomes into desired outcomes via the manipulation of statistical analyses, sample sizes, or data management systems, typically to convert non-significant findings into significant ones.<ref name="Simmons et al. (2011)"/> Some studies have suggested that at least mild versions of these practices are prevalent.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.psychologicalscience.org/index.php/news/releases/questionable-research-practices-surprisingly-common.html|title=Questionable Research Practices Surprisingly Common {{!}} News|date=2012|website=[[Association for Psychological Science]]|access-date=30 May 2014|archive-date=31 May 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140531105054/http://www.psychologicalscience.org/index.php/news/releases/questionable-research-practices-surprisingly-common.html|url-status=live}}</ref>

Some social psychologists have also published fraudulent research that has entered into mainstream academia, most notably the admitted data fabrication by [[Diederik Stapel]]<ref>{{Cite news|last=Shea|first=Christopher|url=https://www.chronicle.com/article/As-Dutch-Research-Scandal/129746/|title=Fraud Scandal Fuels Debate Over Practices of Social Psychology|date=13 November 2011|work=The Chronicle of Higher Education|access-date=24 April 2020|archive-date=5 July 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200705054842/http://www.chronicle.com/article/As-Dutch-Research-Scandal/129746|url-status=live}}</ref> as well as allegations against others. Fraudulent research is not the main contributor to the replication crisis.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Lewandowsky |first1=Stephan |last2=Oberauer |first2=Klaus |date=2020-01-17 |title=Low replicability can support robust and efficient science |journal=Nature Communications |language=en |volume=11 |issue=1 |pages=358 |doi=10.1038/s41467-019-14203-0 |pmid=31953411 |pmc=6969070 |bibcode=2020NatCo..11..358L |issn=2041-1723}}</ref> Many researchers attribute the failure to replicate as a result of the difficulty of being able to recreate the exact same conditions of a study conducted many years before, as the environment and people have changed.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Van Bavel |first1=Jay J. |last2=Mende-Siedlecki |first2=Peter |last3=Brady |first3=William J. |last4=Reinero |first4=Diego A. |date=2016-06-07 |title=Contextual sensitivity in scientific reproducibility |journal=Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences |language=en |volume=113 |issue=23 |pages=6454–6459 |doi=10.1073/pnas.1521897113 |issn=0027-8424 |pmc=4988618 |pmid=27217556 |bibcode=2016PNAS..113.6454V |doi-access=free}}</ref>

Even before the current replication crisis, several effects in social psychology have also been found to be difficult to replicate. For example, the scientific journal ''[[Society for Judgment and Decision Making#Publications and journal|Judgment and Decision Making]]'' has published several studies over the years that fail to provide support for the [[unconscious thought theory]].

Replication failures are not unique to social psychology and are found in many fields of science.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Baker |first=Monya |date=2016-05-01 |title=1,500 scientists lift the lid on reproducibility |journal=Nature |language=en |volume=533 |issue=7604 |pages=452–454 |bibcode=2016Natur.533..452B |doi=10.1038/533452a |issn=1476-4687 |pmid=27225100 |s2cid=4460617|doi-access=free }}</ref> One of the consequences of the current crisis is that some areas of social psychology once considered solid, such as social priming, have come under increased scrutiny due to failure to replicate findings.<ref>{{Cite journal|url=http://chronicle.com/article/Power-of-Suggestion/136907/|title=Power of Suggestion|journal=The Chronicle of Higher Education|first=Tom|last=Bartlett|date=30 January 2013|access-date=30 May 2014|archive-date=28 May 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140528135322/http://chronicle.com/article/Power-of-Suggestion/136907/|url-status=live}}</ref>