Replication is widely recognized as essential for scientific self-correction, yet published replications remain exceedingly rare in both economics and psychology. At the same time, large-scale collaborative replication efforts and growing attention to research transparency have revealed widespread reproducibility failures across empirical research. This article reviews evidence on the scarcity of published replications, examines why traditional journals continue to resist publishing them, and evaluates the “first-best” proposal that journals should publish replications of their own articles. It then surveys alternative models that journals have adopted, such as dedicated replication sections and special replication issues, and considers their limitations in overcoming structural barriers to replication. Because these approaches have not meaningfully expanded the publication of replications, the article argues that dedicated replication journals offer an essential and complementary solution. By providing a stable, credible, and visible home for replication work, these journals supply critical infrastructure for the self-correcting function of science.

We have written a manuscript, entitled International Initiatives to Enhance Awareness and Uptake of Open Research in Psychology: A Systematic Mapping Review, which outlines the global landscape of Open Science initiatives within psychology. This postprint provides a systematic review of 187 initiatives, categorized into procedural, structural, and community-based changes.

Reproducibility and replicability are vital for trustworthy, cumulative research, yet remain undervalued in most areas of academic publishing. Replication Research (R2) is a Diamond Open Access journal dedicated to publishing high-quality reproductions, replications, and related methodological work across disciplines. With robust standards for transparency, open peer review, and social responsibility, R2 offers practical guidance and support for authors. We aim to rebalance research culture by valuing diligence and robustness alongside innovation, thereby increasing confidence in research findings. We invite researchers to contribute to and benefit from an open, community-driven journal designed to elevate the status and impact of replications (repeated studies of published findings with different data) and reproductions (repeated tests of published findings with the same data). In this editorial, we introduce the aims, policies, and scope of Replication Research, outlining how the journal will operate and the values that guide it.

Not all people conform to socially constructed norms, nor should they have to. Neurodiversity, the natural variation in human brains and cognition, is fundamental to understanding human behavior, yet neurodivergent individuals in academia are often stigmatized, undervalued, or pressured to mask their differences. This position statement, authored predominantly by neurodivergent scholars, explores how aligning the values of the neurodiversity movement with practices of Open Scholarship (OSch) can foster greater research integrity, rigor, social responsibility and justice, diversity, equity, inclusivity, and accessibility in academia. We review systemic barriers faced by neurodivergent researchers—from disclosure dilemmas and hidden curriculum expectations to intersectional disadvantages—and identify how OSch principles (transparency, accessibility, collaboration) can help mitigate these challenges. Drawing on lived experiences and current research, we propose concrete reforms, including adopting universal design in scholarly communication, promoting participatory research methods, and enacting supportive policies (e.g., flexible work arrangements, inclusive codes of conduct). By leveraging shared values of openness and neuro-inclusion, academia can become more just and epistemically equitable. Our recommendations chart a path toward an academic culture where neurodivergent scholars can thrive openly, to the benefit of scientific rigor and social justice alike.

Since its inception, the concept of neurodiversity has been defined in a number of different ways, which can cause confusion among those hoping to educate themselves about the topic. To address such barriers, we present an annotated reading list that was developed collaboratively by a neurodiverse group of researchers.

We have written a manuscript about documenting and tracking replication efforts. In psychological science, replicability is critical for affirming the validity of scientific findings. Addressing this crucial gap, we present the Replication Database, a novel platform hosting >1,200 original findings paired with replication findings.

We have written a manuscript entitled Teaching open and reproducible scholarship: a critical review of the evidence base for current pedagogical methods and their outcomes. This manuscript describes the available (empirical) evidence of the impact (and importance) of integrating open scholarship into higher education.

We have written a manuscript entitled The replication crisis has led to positive structural, procedural, and community changes. This manuscript reviews how research structures, procedures and communities have changed in response to the replication crisis, showing that the replication ‘crisis’ has been a positive credibility revolution.

We have written a manuscript entitled Opening up understanding of neurodiversity: A call for applying participatory and open scholarship practices. This manuscript gives a brief overview of what participatory research methods are and why they are important for promoting neurodiversity in academia.

In response to the varied and plural new terminology introduced by the open scholarship movement, we have produced a community and consensus-based Glossary to facilitate education and effective communication. This manuscript presents the beta 0.1 version of our glossary.

We have written a manuscript entitled Towards a culture of open scholarship: The role of pedagogical communities describing the need to integrate open scholarship principles into research training within higher education.

We compiled lesson plans and activities, and categorized them based on their theme, learning outcome, and method of delivery, which are made publicly available.

This paper unpacks the concept of citation politics and its role in sustaining epistemic hierarchies within scholarly communities. We introduce a comprehensive and openly accessible Citational Justice Toolkit.

We have written a manuscript entitled Bridging Neurodiversity and Open Scholarship: How Shared Values Can Guide Best Practices for Research Integrity, Social Justice, and Principled Education explaining that Neurodiversity is fundamental to the understanding of human behaviour and cognition.

We have written a manuscript entitled Introducing a Framework for Open and Reproducible Research Training (FORRT) describing the importance of integrating open scholarship into higher education.

For the Official PLoS Blog, on creating a comprehensive, dynamic database cataloging scientific claims and subsequent replication attempts across various disciplines of social, cognitive, and behavioral sciences.

For The Psychologist, on open scholarship pedagogical communities.

The Letter to UNESCO’s Principles of Open Science Monitoring.

For the Observer, of the Association for Psychological Science, on Navigating Academia as Neurodivergent Researchers.

For In-Mind Magazine, on What is Open Science and Why Does It Need a Glossary.

For the Center of Open Science Blog, on Integrating Open and Reproducible Science Principles into Higher Education.

FORRT was asked by the UK’s Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA) to produce a short briefing note in collaboration with the UK Reproducibility Network (UKRN).

FORRT responded to the call from the UK House of Commons Science and Technology Committee for evidence on reproducibility and research integrity.

We have written to UKRN (UK’s Reproducibility Network) and the British Psychological Society (BPS) a short note on our organization and goals.

Since no standardized approach to measuring reproducibility exists, a diverse set of metrics has emerged and a comprehensive overview is needed. We conducted a scoping review to identify large-scale replication projects that used metrics and methodological papers that proposed or discussed metrics.

We used an extensive protocol to assess the producibility of preregistrations and the consistency between preregistrations and their corresponding papers for 300 psychology studies.

Social psychology is built on a strong set of classical research paradigms and findings… This book is dedicated to tracing some of these changes, and to offering a version of record of the changing perceptions and interpretations of classic social psychology.