AbstractThis mixed methods study investigates international researchers' awareness and use of open research practices and explores variations across regions, disciplines, methodologies and career stages. A total of 3017 researchers across 45 countries and 24 disciplines completed the Brief Open Research Survey, reporting their awareness and use of 11 common open research practices and factors that would support their adoption. Across the sample, respondents reported high awareness of open access publications, preprints and open data, and awareness only fell below 50% for research co-production and registered reports. Use was high for open access publications, but fell below 50% for preprints, open data, open research, open materials, open peer review, open code, preregistration, research co-production, replication and registered reports. Awareness and use varied across the sampled regions (e.g. Europe versus Asia), disciplines (e.g. psychology versus physical sciences), methodologies (e.g. quantitative versus qualitative) and career stages (e.g. PhD students versus professors). Respondents reported that the top five supportive strategies were incentives from funders, institutions and regulators; dedicated funding; recognition in promotion and recruitment criteria; more training; and more information. Qualitative responses provide insight into challenges and opportunities. Estimates of awareness can guide training initiatives, while estimates of use can inform policy development and longitudinal evaluations of behaviour change. Variations between regions, disciplines, methodologies and career stages should be acknowledged.

Pursuing replicability - independent evidence for previous claims - is important for creating generalizable knowledge(1,2). Here we attempted replications of 274 claims of positive results from 164 quantitative papers published from 2009 to 2018 in 54 journals in the social and behavioural sciences. Replications were high powered on average to detect the original effect size (median of 99.6%), used original materials when relevant and available, and were peer reviewed in advance through a standardized internal protocol. Replications showed statistically significant results in the original pattern for 151 of 274 claims (55.1% (95% confidence interval (CI) 49.2-60.9%)) and for 80.8 of 164 papers (49.3% (95% CI 43.8-54.7%)), weighed for replicating multiple claims per paper. We observed modest variation in replication rates across disciplines (42.5-63.1%), although some estimates had high uncertainty. The median Pearson's r effect size was 0.25 (95% CI 0.21-0.27) for original studies and 0.10 (95% CI 0.09-0.13) for replication studies, an 82.4% (95% CI 67.8-88.2%) reduction in shared variance. Thirteen methods for evaluating replication success provided estimates ranging from 28.6% to 74.8% (median of 49.3%). Some decline in effect size and significance is expected based on power to detect original effects and regression to the mean because we replicated only positive results. We observe that challenges for replicability extend across social-behavioural sciences, illustrating the importance of identifying conditions that promote or inhibit replicability(3,4).

AbstractSexual violence against women and girls is a serious concern, and past research suggests that evolutionary theories have the potential to promote victim-blaming attitudes among laypeople. This registered report investigated whether evolutionary explanations for male aggression increase biological essentialism, and whether this, in turn, impacts attributions about an ‘ambiguous’ rape vignette. This two-part study collected data from 606 demographically representative UK participants. Science outreach videos were used as the experimental manipulation following facts about men’s sexual aggression: an evolutionary explanation presented by David Buss, a social explanation presented by Jackson Katz, and a control condition (video about nature). Then, participants completed a biological essentialism measure, read a rape vignette and completed measures of rape attributions. Our results indicated that the evolutionary condition led to higher victim culpability as compared to the social condition, through an increase in biological essentialism. There were no effects of the experimental conditions when compared to the nature video. There were no effects on perpetrator culpability. We conclude that evolutionary psychology can increase victim-blaming attitudes through an increase in the belief that gender roles are natural and immutable, and that this can be understood through the theoretical framework ‘the cultural scaffolding of rape’.

PurposeSexual violence against women remains a pressing issue. Myths and misconceptions about sexual violence maintain high levels of victim blame throughout society, with negative consequences for women subjected to rape. The Acceptance of Modern Myths About Sexual Aggression (AMMSA; AMMSA-21) scale has been used to assess the adherence to such myths across a wide range of countries. Yet, the prevalence of qualitatively different beliefs about sexual violence calls for an instrument that systematically differentiates content domains. The purpose of this paper is to develop and implement a three-dimensional AMMSA scale that can be a fine-tuned tool to assess attitudes to sexual violence.Design/methodology/approachGiven the increased prominence of the belief that women routinely lie about rape (WL), alongside the continued relevance of beliefs that blame women for rape (BW), and minimize the scope and severity of rape (MI), the present research sought to develop a three-dimensional scale - the AMMSA-3D - featuring three correlated factors: WL, BW and MI. The AMMSA-3D was developed in three languages and validated in three different countries: UK, Germany and Italy.FindingsConfirmatory factor analyses showed the best fit for a model consisting of three correlated factors loading onto one general AMMSA factor. Further analyses supported the assumption of discriminant validity of the three factors regarding case-related outcome variables, with WL being the best predictor of perceived victim credibility, BW predicting victim blame and MI predicting the perceived severity of consequences. However, MI had weaker predictive value than the other two factors across the three studies.Originality/valueThis study is unique in implementing a three-dimensional AMMSA scale to study attitudes to sexual violence. The authors conclude that there is empirical validity in a three-dimensional AMMSA scale, and that the AMMSA-3D is a fine-tuned tool to assess attitudes to sexual violence that predict specific judgments regarding rape cases.

Confronting prejudice is a promising strategy for reducing intergroup bias. The current meta-analysis estimated the effects of confronting prejudice on intergroup bias in the confronted person and examined the impact of potential moderators. Eligible studies measured intergroup bias in participants confronted versus not confronted for intergroup bias. A three-level mixed-effects analysis on 91 effect sizes found a significant, medium-sized effect of confronting prejudice on reducing intergroup bias (g(+) = 0.54). There was only limited evidence of publication bias. Confrontation was differentially effective at reducing different types of intergroup bias with a medium-to-large effect on using or endorsing stereotypes, small-to-medium effects on behavior and behavioral intentions, and no significant effects on cognitive prejudice. Effects were otherwise largely robust to differences in confrontation, sample, and study design characteristics. Yet, studies predominantly focused on whether confronting the use of stereotypes reduced subsequent use of stereotypes in artificial settings, and primarily sampled U.S.-based, young, White adults, making it difficult to generalize effects to other forms of intergroup bias and populations, particularly in real-world settings. Studies also tended to measure intergroup bias immediately after confrontation, so the duration of effects over longer periods is less clear. To better evaluate the potential of confrontation as a prejudice reduction technique, future research should examine whether confronting prejudice reduces different forms of intergroup bias in more diverse participant samples and settings, over longer periods, and further test theoretical mediators of these effects.

The realities of rape are crucial in highlighting the need for feminism in society. Yet, backlash against feminism is rife, and misconceptions about rape ("rape myths") are ubiquitous. In this paper, I analyse whether rape myths are reflected in the manosphere's central hub, The Red Pill, and theorise on how this may in turn reflect myths about rape in society. I analyse The Red Pill sidebar (a permanent ideological guide for community users) using reflexive thematic analysis underpinned by rape mythology as a theoretical framework. Through three themes centred around the sidebar's enactment of masculinity (Alpha pursued), portrayal of the essential nature of women (The deceitful child), and the rejection of a mainstream woman-centred reality of claimed victimhood (Spitting out the gynocentric conspiracy), I illustrate that sidebar ideology is underpinned by rape myths. The Red Pill reflects rape mythology already present in society, and these rape myths are reflected back into the mainstream, strengthening social constructions of rape. Anti-feminist rape mythology on The Red Pill requires cultural scaffolding to resonate, but this community also serves to strengthen this scaffolding, insulating society from feminist ideas. Future research should focus on how scientific sexism scaffolds rape mythology and antifeminism.

Despite extensive coverage of a relationship between memory performance and executive function in the obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) literature, the relative contributions of specific aspects of executive control have remained elusive. We, therefore, extend our previous multilevel meta-analysis (Persson et al., 2021), where demand on executive function was the most significant determinant of memory deficits in OCD, and provide a finer-grained analysis of executive control via a segregation into top-down (attentional control, maintenance and updating, planning) and bottom-up (perceptual integration, perceptual salience) contributions. Our multilevel meta-analytic approach allowed us to accommodate the interdependency of 255 effect sizes from 131 studies, totaling 4,101 OCD patients. Results revealed that maintenance and updating (top-down) and perceptual integration (bottom-up) predicted memory performance generally, and specifically in those with clinical OCD. Exploratory analyses suggested that this effect may be somewhat different among subclinical OCD groups; however, these findings should be considered with conceptual and analytical caveats in mind. We explain these results via deficient sensory (perceptual integration) and working memory (maintenance and updating) gating mechanisms and propose a model to accommodate their expression in OC symptoms. In conclusion, our meta-analysis has expanded understanding of cognitive performance in OCD and identifies the possibility of untapped cognitive targets for intervention. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

OBJECTIVE The development of serious games for mental wellbeing is a topic of growing interest. The increase in acceptance of games as a mainstream entertainment medium combined with the immersive qualities of games provides opportunities for meaningful support and intervention in mental wellbeing. METHOD We conducted a systematic review and exploratory meta-analysis to examine if aspects of the interventions influenced outcomes as measured via overall effect sizes. We employed a multilevel meta-analytic approach to accommodate the interdependency of effect sizes (18 effect sizes from 14 studies, with 2027 participants). RESULTS Overall, the main effect for gaming interventions on any outcome variable was small to medium sized, d = .35 (confidence interval [.23, 47], p < .001). Results revealed that the only significant moderator was the nature of the intervention. Specifically, only interventions that included a rational emotional behavioural focus significantly predicted an improvement in depression and/or anxiety in participants. CONCLUSION The findings reveal promising effects for therapeutic games for mental health, but replications are needed, alongside the addressing of methodological and procedural concerns.

Research shows that questionable research practices (QRPs) are present in undergraduate final-year dissertation projects. One entry-level Open Science practice proposed to mitigate QRPs is "study preregistration," through which researchers outline their research questions, design, method, and analysis plans before data collection and/or analysis. In this study, we aimed to empirically test the effectiveness of preregistration as a pedagogic tool in undergraduate dissertations using a quasi-experimental design. A total of 89 UK psychology students were recruited, including students who preregistered their empirical quantitative dissertation (n = 52; experimental group) and students who did not (n = 37; control group). Attitudes toward statistics, acceptance of QRPs, and perceived understanding of Open Science were measured both before and after dissertation completion. Exploratory measures included capability, opportunity, and motivation to engage with preregistration, measured at Time 1 only. This study was conducted as a Registered Report; Stage 1 protocol: https://osf.io/9hjbw (date of in-principle acceptance: September 21, 2021). Study preregistration did not significantly affect attitudes toward statistics or acceptance of QRPs. However, students who preregistered reported greater perceived understanding of Open Science concepts from Time 1 to Time 2 compared with students who did not preregister. Exploratory analyses indicated that students who preregistered reported significantly greater capability, opportunity, and motivation to preregister. Qualitative responses revealed that preregistration was perceived to improve clarity and organization of the dissertation, prevent QRPs, and promote rigor. Disadvantages and barriers included time, perceived rigidity, and need for training. These results contribute to discussions surrounding embedding Open Science principles into research training.

Background: Victim blame, particularly in cases of acquaintance rape, presents an obstacle to criminal justice. Past research indicates that acquaintance rape results in more blame than stranger rape. However, there are inconsistencies in these findings (e.g., whether there is a linear relationship between victim blame and relationship closeness), partly due to methodological variation. Objectives: To examine the effect of victim–perpetrator relationship on victim blame, how this effect is impacted by rape myth acceptance (RMA) and ambivalent sexism (AS), and to establish what the methodological quality is of studies. Synthesis method: Studies were synthesized through a multilevel meta-analysis using the Metafor package in R (version 2.4-0), synthesizing findings from 47 individual studies. Studies compared victim blame between stranger and acquaintance rape, in isolation or in conjunction with RMA and AS, and were identified through a database search. Results: The review found higher levels of blame in acquaintance as compared to stranger rape, with a medium effect size. This effect was not moderated by RMA. AS was not included as a moderator in the meta-analysis, but the review indicated that benevolent sexism may be a particularly relevant variable. Implications: Future research should examine the relationship between AS and victim blame. The current review contributes to the evidence base on victim blame in rape cases by suggesting that methodological limitations can account for some of the past mixed findings in this area, particularly in a lack of consistency in vignette details. It is recommended that future sexual assault research uses rigorous methodology and increases transparency of research processes.

Rape is a serious concern globally. Past research has identified Ambivalent Sexism (AS), Rape Myth Acceptance (RMA), and the victim-perpetrator relationship as key constructs influencing rape blame attributions and rape proclivity. Limitations with methodologies have, however, limited the practical implications of past research, particularly in the context of underpowered samples and a lack of transparency in vignette development and implementation. In the current research, three studies aimed to validate material to be used in research into rape perceptions and to examine the impact of victim-perpetrator relationship, AS, and RMA on victim and perpetrator culpability, and rape proclivity, using an experimental design. On 563 participants, this research developed and validated six rape vignettes which accounted for methodological limitations of past research (Study One) and were found to be believable and realistic by participants; it further found that aggressively sexist attitudes were associated with increased victim culpability and decreased perpetrator culpability (Study Two), and increased rape proclivity (Study Three). Scenarios of a casual acquaintance produced the highest levels of victim culpability and the lowest levels of perpetrator culpability. Victims were ascribed more control than blame, or responsibility. Men reported the highest levels of rape proclivity in scenarios of casual acquaintance, and intimate partner relationships. Contrary to past research, Benevolent Sexism (BS) did not directly impact attributions in rape cases but may maintain and legitimize the attitudes, which do. As some of our findings contradict past research, we suggest that the need for standardized rape vignettes is evident, along with greater transparency and methodological rigor in sexual assault research, as this will improve the practical implications of findings. Reproducible research practices may be useful for this. While limited in diversity, this research has important implications for policy and research practice, particularly in producing validated material that can be reused by future researchers.

Abuse against women’s rights activists is a serious concern, but there is a lack of research into strategies on how to reduce this. Past research has identified self-affirmation (i.e., thinking about one’s valued traits) and perspective-taking as promising strategies to reduce minority target backlash. Through one pilot study ( n = 98), and one two-part experimental study ( n = 202), we tested the effect of perspective-taking and self-affirmation on empathy toward feminism among men. Fictional Facebook profiles were manipulated to encourage perspective-taking, perspective-taking with self-affirmation, or were neutral in content. Participants then rated feelings toward individual feminists as well as feelings (in the context of perspective-taking emotions) toward abuse faced by feminists more generally. Results indicated that perspective-taking combined with self-affirmation promoted empathetic feelings (as represented by perspective-taking emotions) toward feminists experiencing abuse. The impact on empathy was particularly strong among men with high initial prejudice toward feminists. These results suggest that self-affirmation could potentially reduce online abuse of feminists through an increase in empathetic feelings. This research has broader implications for male engagement within feminism, and we recommend that educators and male allies of feminism promote positive, affirming roles for men (e.g., as fathers), as this may encourage empathy toward feminist issues. Policy makers could consider this strategy in the context of promoting policies such as shared parental leave. Online slides for instructors who want to use this article for teaching are available on PWQ's website at http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/suppl/10.1177/03616843211017472

Even though memory performance is a commonly researched aspect of Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD), a coherent and unified explanation of the role of specific cognitive factors has remained elusive. To address this, the present meta-analysis examined the predictive validity of Harkin and Kessler’s (2011) Executive Function (E), Binding Complexity (B) and Memory Load (L) Classification System with regards to affected vs. unaffected memory performance in OCD. We employed a multi-level meta-analytic approach (Viechtbauer, 2010) to accommodate the interdependent nature of the EBL model and interdependency of effect sizes (305 effect sizes from 144 studies, including 4424 OCD patients). Results revealed that the EBL model predicted memory performance, i.e., as EBL demand increases, those with OCD performed progressively worse on memory tasks. Executive function was the driving mechanism behind the EBL’s impact on OCD memory performance and negated effect size differences between visual and verbal tasks in those with OCD. Comparisons of sub-task effect sizes were also generally in accord with the cognitive parameters of the EBL taxonomy. We conclude that standardised coding of tasks along individual cognitive dimensions and multi-level meta-analyses provides a new approach to examine multi-dimensional models of memory and cognitive performance in OCD and other disorders.