With the change in the location of school education from the classroom to the home during the COVID-19 outbreak, there should be more educational caregiving from children’s parents when children learn online. Parental involvement in children’s online learning including study guide and psychological counseling is the specific content of educational caregiving, which is different from face-to-face learning. More attention should be paid to parental involvement and parents’ satisfaction with the online learning effect. This study therefore conducted a survey on middle (...) school students’ parents to establish a moderating model, exploring the influence of parental involvement on parent satisfaction, and the number of children and parental education level as the moderator variables influencing parental involvement. The results show that there is a significant positive correlation between parental involvement and satisfaction, while the parental education level and the number of children both have a moderating effect on the relationship between parental involvement and parent satisfaction. The moderating effect of the education level of parents shows negative, while the moderating effect of the number of children is positive. An interesting finding is that the number of children has a very low influence on parental involvement. (shrink)

Psychological science is maturing and therefore transitioning from explorative to theory-driven research. While explorative research seeks to find something “new,” theory-driven research seeks to elaborate on already known and hence predictable effects. A consequence of these differences is that the quality of explorative and theory-driven research needs to be judged by distinct criterions that optimally support their respective development. Especially, theory-driven research needs to be judged by its methodological rigor. A focus on innovativeness, which is typical for explorative research, will (...) instead incentivize bad research practices (e.g., imprecise theorizing, ignoring previous research, parallel theories). To support the advancement of psychology, we must drop the innovation requirement for theory-driven research and instead require the strongest methods, which are marked by high internal and external validity. Precise theorizing needs to substitute novelty. Theories are advanced by requiring explicit, testable assumptions, and an explicit preference for one theory over another. These explicit and potentially wrong assumptions should not be silenced within the peer-review process, but instead be scrutinized in new publications. Importantly, these changes in scientific conduct need to be supported by senior researchers, especially, in their roles as editors, reviewers, and in the hiring process. An important obstacle to further theory-driven research is to measure scientific merit using researchers’ number of publications, which favors theoretically shallow and imprecise writing. Additionally, it makes publications the central target of scientific misconduct even though they are the main source of information for the scientific community and the public. To advance the field, researchers should be judged by their contribution to the scientific community (e.g., exchange with and support of colleagues, and mentoring). Another step to advance psychology is to clearly differentiate between measurement model and theory, and not to overgeneralize based on few stimuli, incidences, or studies. We will use ideas from the theory of science to underline the changes necessary within the field of psychology to overcome this existential replication crisis. (shrink)

Many philosophers of science and methodologists have argued that the ability to repeat studies and obtain similar results is an essential component of science. A finding is elevated from single observation to scientific evidence when the procedures that were used to obtain it can be reproduced and the finding itself can be replicated. Recent replication attempts show that some high profile results – most notably in psychology, but in many other disciplines as well – cannot be replicated consistently. These replication (...) attempts have generated a considerable amount of controversy, and the issue of whether direct replications have value has, in particular, proven to be contentious. However, much of this discussion has occurred in published commentaries and social media outlets, resulting in a fragmented discourse. To address the need for an integrative summary, we review various types of replication studies and then discuss the most commonly voiced concerns about direct replication. We provide detailed responses to these concerns and consider different statistical ways to evaluate replications. We conclude there are no theoretical or statistical obstacles to making direct replication a routine aspect of psychological science. (shrink)

The present article aims to analyze from epistemological and methodological point of view, the most common practices in developing a scientific article, starting from the perspective of the editor of scientific journals. Understanding the mechanisms of peer review, usually determine authors to reformulate their articles so that reviewers are more inclined to accept the proposal for publication. In developing a scientific article, in order to be submitted for publication, a series of principles should be taken into consideration, principles to ensure (...) the article a necessary audience and a better perception of the informational content. Scientific publication focuses on disseminating the results of the research that we achieved. Publication in specialized journals takes into account the audience offered by these journals. (shrink)