Journal article reporting standards for quantitative research in psychology: The APA Publications and Communications Board task force report.

By M. Appelbaum, H. Cooper, Rex Bryan Kline, E. Mayo-Wilson, A. Nezu, Stephen M. Rao. American Psychologist, 2018

1,195 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: General Health Professions, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0431809e221520c52221b58c986d57fab936f61d

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In General Health Professions

In Statistics and Probability

Citations in the corpus

Does the Flipped Classroom Improve Student Learning and Satisfaction? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (2019, background): “This is recommended in various reporting standards (American Educational Research Association, 2006; Appelbaum et al., 2018; Schulz, Altman, & Moher, 2010) but is not generally followed.”
REPORTING GUIDELINES FOR META‐ANALYSIS IN ECONOMICS (2020, methodology): “Although other guidelines for conducting and reporting meta-analyses have been offered (Stroup et al., 2000; Higgins and Green, 2017; Appelbaum et al., 2018), none other than Stanley et al. (2013) have explicitly considered the type of empirical evidence typically found in applied econometric…”
Methodological Guidance Paper: High-Quality Meta-Analysis in a Systematic Review (2019, methodology): “The MARS (Appelbaum et al., 2018) and PRISMA (Moher et al., 2009) guidelines each provide a helpful framework for meta-analysts to follow when reporting the results of the study.”
Best Practices in Data Collection and Preparation: Recommendations for Reviewers, Editors, and Authors (2019, background): “…transparency, many published articles in management and related fields do not include sufficient information on precise steps, decisions, and judgment calls made during a scientific study (Aguinis, Ramani, & Alabduljader, 2018; Aguinis & Solarino, 2019; Appelbaum et al., 2018; Levitt et al., 2018).”
Advancing the social identity theory of leadership: A meta-analytic review of leader group prototypicality (2020, methodology): “Following best-practice recommendations, in conducting and reporting the present research, we followed the American Psychological Association’s Meta-Analysis Reporting Standards (Appelbaum et al., 2018) and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (Moher et al., 2009).”
The Way Forward in Mindfulness and Sustainability: a Critical Review and Research Agenda (2020, methodology): “In all cases, the reporting of the qualitative and mixed methods research process should follow standard procedures of qualitative research (Levitt et al. 2018).”
Psychological Science Needs a Standard Practice of Reporting the Reliability of Cognitive-Behavioral Measurements (2019, background): “Many authors have made this same point (for a few examples, see Appelbaum et al., 2018; Cooper et al., 2017; Hedge et al., 2018; LeBel & Paunonen, 2011; and Wilkinson & Task Force on Statistical Inference, 1999).”
Latent Class Analysis: A Guide to Best Practice (2020, background): “To present clear results and justified conclusions, LCA reports need to detail study procedures and results with clarity and coherence (Appelbaum et al., 2018).”