Questionable Research Practices Among Faculty and Students in APA-Accredited Clinical and Counseling Psychology Doctoral Programs

This study examines self-reported engagement in questionable research practices (QRPs) by faculty (N = 164) and students (N = 110) in American Psychological Association-accredited clinical and counseling psychology doctoral programs. Both faculty and student participants were asked to report their own engagement as well as the engagement of their graduate school mentor in 12 QRPs. Nearly 65% of the faculty participants and 50% of the student participants reported engaging in at least one QRP. The most commonly reported QRP was selectively reporting findings that worked (35% for faculty, 26% for students), and the least commonly admitted was falsifying data (0% for faculty, 1% for students). Total number of QRPs engaged in was significantly predicted by knowledge of mentor engagement in QRPs (explaining 34% of the variance for faculty and 19% of the variance for students), but it was not predicted by degree year, number of publications, or self-reported researcher reputation. These results suggest that QRPs do occur in the field but perhaps at lower levels than had previously been thought. They also suggest that additional training in QRPs is needed. Training implications and future directions are discussed. Public Significance Statement This study surveyed faculty and students in clinical and counseling psychology doctoral programs about their engagement in questionable research practices. The majority of participants reported engaging in at least one questionable research practice, and self-engagement was significantly associated with knowledge of mentor engagement. These results have important training implications for young scholars who aim to produce reliable and accurate research.