Ten steps toward a better personality science – how quality may be rewarded more in research evaluation

• DOI: 10.5964/ps.6029
• Publication Date: 2022-05-06T12:00:59Z
• Authors: Daniel Leising; Isabel Thielmann; Andreas Glöckner; Anne Gärtner; Felix Schönbrodt
• Keywords: Toolbox; Replication

This target article is part of a theme bundle including open peer commentaries (https://doi.org/10.5964/ps.9227) and rejoinder by the authors (https://doi.org/10.5964/ps.7961). We point out ten steps that we think will go long way in improving personality science. The first five focus on fostering consensus regarding (1) research goals, (2) terminology, (3) measurement practices, (4) data handling, (5) current state theory evidence. other credibility empirical research, through (6) formal modelling, (7) mandatory pre-registration for confirmatory claims, (8) replication as routine practice, (9) planning informative studies (e.g., terms statistical power), (10) making data, analysis scripts, materials openly available. current, quantity-based incentive structure academia clearly stands implementing many these resulting literature with sometimes questionable utility and/or integrity. As solution, propose more quality-based reward scheme explicitly weights published its Good Science merits. Scientists need to be increasingly rewarded doing good work, not just lots work.