About this Research Topic

Background

Psychology’s continued crises in replicability, validity, generalisability—and thus confidence in its findings—are currently attributed primarily to questionable research practices (QRPs; e.g., p-hacking, HARKing, cherry-picking). Popular pertinent debates therefore centre on proposals for remedying inappropriate method applications (e.g., larger samples, robust statistics, pre-registration, replication). Replicable non-random effects of psychological interventions and differentiations between individuals are essential for applied purposes. But current approaches to replicability, validity and psychometric modelling are merely pragmatic, providing evidence of just utility to discriminate well and consistently between cases and in ways considered important (e.g., social relevance, relations to future outcomes). Yet without understanding the study phenomena in themselves (e.g., individuals’ experience, beliefs, thought processes) and without elaborating how relevant features of them can be made amenable to quantitative investigation, and if at all (the quantity objection), the actual causes of replicable quantitative findings cannot be explored.

These causes, however, may be completely unrelated to the actual study phenomena (e.g., methodomorphism). This concerns in particular the ‘attributes’ and ‘latent constructs’ studied in psychology given that these are theoretical and statistical concepts that are attributed and construed as means of investigation and that only refer to but do not constitute the actual study phenomena in themselves. We believe the currently debated deficiencies of quantitative practices in psychology are just surface symptoms whereas fundamental problems (e.g., the inappropriateness of statistical assumptions for psychical phenomena) and the actual root causes underlying psychology’s crises and disputes around its scientific status are still hardly addressed.

With this Research Topic, we want to give new impetus to critical debates on the epistemological and methodological foundations of quantitative methods and measurement in psychology, including problems long known but still hardly considered. Examples are:
- The behavioural and psychical phenomena’s non-ergodicity, rendering sample-level statistics uninformative about individual-level phenomena;
- Psychometricians’ alignment of results to statistical theories rather than to features of the study phenomena, biasing inferences on the latter;
- Ideas that laypeople’s intuitive judgements could reveal quantitative structures in complex, largely unobservable phenomena;
- The still unsupported claim that psychical phenomena could have quantitative properties at all and could thus be measured;
- The fact that psychometric structures shown for verbal item judgements can also be produced by semantic and Artificial Intelligence (AI) algorithms (e.g., ChatGPT) without collecting any empirical data.

Still, most quantitative psychologists seem fairly unconcerned about the strong reliance on everyday language (e.g., in ratings ‘scales’) and the imprecise concepts of psychological ‘measurement’—perhaps because their consequences do not become as straightforwardly apparent as in other disciplines, such as in physics, chemistry and medicine where imprecise measurement can entail the collapse of buildings, chemical explosions or drug overdoses. But where does the loose jargon around ‘measurement’, ‘variables’ and ‘psychometrics’ go seriously wrong in psychology? These and further contradictions, problems and challenges underlying established quantitative practices in psychology must be addressed to tackle the discipline’s continued crises and to develop new approaches that are needed to advance psychology as a science.

We invite from all fields contributions that critically explore and open up new perspectives on the foundations of quantification and measurement in psychology, including perspectives still hardly considered (e.g., qualitative mathematics, complex dynamic systems, fuzzy systems modelling, machine learning). We are also interested in methods for generating quantitative data either executed by persons (e.g., time-based observations, computer-based coding) or by automated technology (e.g., ecological momentary monitoring, life logging, reality mining).

However, other than commonly done, we are explicitly not seeking proposals for improving specific techniques of data analysis (e.g., statistical or latent variable models). Instead, our focus is on making explicit and scrutinising the (implicitly) underlying rationales and fundamental principles—thus, the theory, philosophy and methodology on which quantitative research in psychology currently is or should be built in the future. This also includes critical views on whether or not quantitative investigations are meaningful at all for a science exploring behaviour, mind and society, and thus, also contributions to the psychology, sociology and philosophy of science in this field.

Article types and fees

This Research Topic accepts the following article types, unless otherwise specified in the Research Topic description:

• Brief Research Report
• Case Report
• Conceptual Analysis
• Data Report
• Editorial
• General Commentary
• Hypothesis and Theory
• Methods
• Mini Review
• ... View all formats

Articles that are accepted for publication by our external editors following rigorous peer review incur a publishing fee charged to Authors, institutions, or funders.

Article types

This Research Topic accepts the following article types, unless otherwise specified in the Research Topic description:

• Brief Research Report
• Case Report
• Conceptual Analysis
• Data Report
• Editorial
• General Commentary
• Hypothesis and Theory
• Methods
• Mini Review
• Opinion
• Original Research
• Perspective
• Registered Report
• Review
• Systematic Review
• Technology and Code

Keywords: Theory and philosophy (methodology) of measurement, Epistemology of quantitative psychology, Quantitative data generation, Transparency, Traceability, Replicability, Validity, Generalizability, Semantic algorithms, Artificial intelligence algorithms

Important note: All contributions to this Research Topic must be within the scope of the section and journal to which they are submitted, as defined in their mission statements. Frontiers reserves the right to guide an out-of-scope manuscript to a more suitable section or journal at any stage of peer review.

Frequently asked questions

• What is a Research Topic?

  Frontiers' Research Topics are collaborative hubs built around an emerging theme.Defined, managed, and led by renowned researchers, they bring communities together around a shared area of interest to stimulate collaboration and innovation.

  Unlike section journals, which serve established specialty communities, Research Topics are pioneer hubs, responding to the evolving scientific landscape and catering to new communities.

• Why does Frontiers publish Research Topics? 

  The goal of Frontiers' publishing program is to empower research communities to actively steer the course of scientific publishing. Our program was implemented as a three-part unit with fixed field journals, flexible specialty sections, and dynamically emerging Research Topics, connecting communities of different sizes and maturity.

  Research Topics originate from the scientific community. Many of our Research Topics are suggested by existing editorial board members who have identified critical challenges or areas of interest in their field.

• Why are Research Topics important for journals?

  As an editor, Research Topics will help you build your journal, as well as your community, around emerging, cutting-edge research. As research trailblazers, Research Topics attract high-quality submissions from leading experts all over the world.

  A thriving Research Topic can potentially evolve into a new specialty section if there is sustained interest and a growing community around it.

• How do we ensure the quality of articles within Research Topics?

  Each Research Topic must be approved by the specialty chief editor, and they fall under the editorial oversight of our editorial boards, supported by our in-house research integrity team. The same standards and rigorous peer review processes apply to articles published as part of a Research Topic as for any other article we publish.

    In 2023, 80% of the Research Topics we published were edited or co-edited by our editorial board members, who are already familiar with their journal's scope, ethos, and publishing model. All other topics are guest edited by leaders in their field, each vetted and formally approved by the specialty chief editor.

• What are the benefits of publishing my article in a Research Topic?

  Publishing your article within a Research Topic with other related articles increases its discoverability and visibility, which can lead to more views, downloads, and citations. Research Topics grow dynamically as more published articles are added, causing frequent revisiting, and further visibility.

  As Research Topics are multidisciplinary, they are cross-listed in several fields and section journals – increasing your reach even more and giving you the chance to expand your network and collaborate with researchers in different fields, all focusing on expanding knowledge around the same important topic.

  Our larger Research Topics are also converted into ebooks and receive social media promotion from our digital marketing team.

   
• What types of articles can be published in a Research Topic?

  Frontiers offers multiple article types, but it will depend on the field and section journals in which the Research Topic will be featured. The available article types for a Research Topic will appear in the drop-down menu during the submission process.

  Check available article types here 

• Can I suggest a new Research Topic? 

  Yes, we would love to hear your ideas for a topic. Most of our Research Topics are community-led and suggested by researchers in the field. Our in-house editorial team will contact you to talk about your idea and whether you’d like to edit the topic. If you’re an early-stage researcher, we will offer you the opportunity to coordinate your topic, with the support of a senior researcher as the topic editor. 

  Suggest your topic here 

• Who leads a Research Topic? 

  A team of guest editors (called topic editors) lead their Research Topic. This editorial team oversees the entire process, from the initial topic proposal to calls for participation, the peer review, and final publications.

  The team may also include topic coordinators, who help the topic editors send calls for participation, liaise with topic editors on abstracts, and support contributing authors. In some cases, they can also be assigned as reviewers.

• What is the role of a topic editor?

  As a topic editor (TE), you will take the lead on all editorial decisions for the Research Topic, starting with defining its scope. This allows you to curate research around a topic that interests you, bring together different perspectives from leading researchers across different fields and shape the future of your field. 

   

  You will choose your team of co-editors, curate a list of potential authors, send calls for participation and oversee the peer review process, accepting or recommending rejection for each manuscript submitted.

• What support will I receive when editing a new Research Topic? 

  As a topic editor, you're supported at every stage by our in-house team. You will be assigned a single point of contact to help you on both editorial and technical matters. Your topic is managed through our user-friendly online platform, and the peer review process is supported by our industry-first AI review assistant (AIRA).

• As a junior researcher, can I be involved in editing a Research Topic? 

  If you’re an early-stage researcher, we will offer you the opportunity to coordinate your topic, with the support of a senior researcher as the topic editor. This provides you with valuable editorial experience, improving your ability to critically evaluate research articles and enhancing your understanding of the quality standards and requirements for scientific publishing, as well as the opportunity to discover new research in your field, and expand your professional network.

• Can I get a certificate for editing a Research Topic?

  Yes, certificates can be issued on request. We are happy to provide a certificate for your contribution to editing a successful Research Topic.

• Who will I collaborate with?

  Research Topics thrive on collaboration and their multi-disciplinary approach around emerging, cutting-edge themes, attract leading researchers from all over the world.

• How long does it take to publish a Research Topic?

  As a topic editor, you can set the timeline for your Research Topic, and we will work with you at your pace. Typically, Research Topics are online and open for submissions within a few weeks and remain open for participation for 6 – 12 months. Individual articles within a Research Topic are published as soon as they are ready.

  Find out more about our Research Topics

• What fee support is available to authors publishing in a Research Topic?

  Our fee support program ensures that all articles that pass peer review, including those published in Research Topics, can benefit from open access – regardless of the author's field or funding situation.

  Authors and institutions with insufficient funding can apply for a discount on their publishing fees. A fee support application form is available on our website.

• Will there be a printed version of my RT?

  In line with our mission to promote healthy lives on a healthy planet, we do not provide printed materials. All our articles and ebooks are available under a CC-BY license, so you can share and print copies.