Abstract
Psychology programs often emphasize inferential statistical tests over a solid understanding of data and research design. This imbalance may leave graduates underequipped to effectively interpret research and employ data to answer questions. We conducted a two-round modified Delphi to identify the research-methods skills that the UK psychology community deems essential for undergraduates to learn. Participants included 103 research-methods instructors, academics, students, and nonacademic psychologists. Of 78 items included in the consensus process, 34 reached consensus. We coupled these results with a qualitative analysis of 707 open-ended text responses to develop nine recommendations for organizations that accredit undergraduate psychology programs—such as the British Psychological Society. We recommend that accreditation standards emphasize (1) data skills, (2) research design, (3) descriptive statistics, (4) critical analysis, (5) qualitative methods, and (6) both parameter estimation and significance testing; as well as (7) give precedence to foundational skills, (8) promote transferable skills, and (9) create space in curricula to enable these recommendations. Our data and findings can inform modernized accreditation standards to include clearly defined, assessable, and widely encouraged skills that foster a competent graduate body for the contemporary world.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Journal | Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science |
| Volume | 7 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| Early online date | 29 Jan 2024 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 29 Jan 2024 |
Data Availability Statement
All data and materials have been made publicly available on the Open Science Framework at https://osf.io/hpsq4. The study protocol and materials were registered on 06 February 2023 at https://osf.io/5h7bu. Discrepancies between this manuscript and the registered protocol are outlined in the Supplementary Material C. To facilitate reproducibility, the results section of this article was written by interleaving regular prose and analysis code using R Markdown. The relevant files are available in a Code Ocean container (https://doi.org/10.24433/CO.0483372.v1), which recreates the software environment in which the original analyses were performed. This container allows the results section of the article to be reproduced from the data and code with a single button press. This article has received the badges for Open Data, Open Materials, and Preregistration. More information about the Open Practices badges can be found at http://www.psychologicalscience.org/publications/badgesAcknowledgements
We thank Patricia Lyons from the British Psychological Society for collaborating in the development of this project. We thank Charlotte Pennington and Patricia Lyons for feedback on drafts of the initial set of Delphi items. This publication is the work of the authors, and R. T. Thibault will serve as guarantor for the contents of this article. The funders have no role in the preparation of this article or the decision to publish.We asked several organizations if they could advertise this Delphi study by sharing it with their contacts (e.g., UK Reproducibility Network, ReproducibiliTea, Framework for Open and Reproducible Research Training—FORRT). This is the only capacity in which these organizations were involved.
Keywords
- accreditation standards
- British Psychological Society
- consensus
- Delphi
- psychology education
- qualitative methods
- replication
- research design
- research methods
- statistics
- undergraduate
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- General Psychology