Main Article Content
The present commentary piece discusses HARKing as a form of scientific misconduct that Indonesian scholars, particularly in psychology, should avoid. I specifically elaborate on HARKing as a practice that goes against the basic principle of scientific research (i.e., the falsification principle). I also provide some examples of HARKing practices that psychological researchers should avoid. Finally, I noted a crucial reason why Jurnal Psikologi Ulayat needs to be attentive to HARKing practices.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
- Andrade, C. (2021). HARKing, cherry-picking, p-hacking, fishing expeditions, and data dredging and mining as questionable research practices. The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 82, e1–e3. https://doi.org/10.4088/JCP.20f13804
- Earp, B. D., & Trafimow, D. (2015). Replication, falsification, and the crisis of confidence in social psychology. Frontiers in Psychology, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00621
- Holtz, P., & Monnerjahn, P. (2017). Falsificationism is not just ‘potential’ falsifiability, but requires ‘actual’ falsification: Social psychology, critical rationalism, and progress in science. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 47, 348–362. https://doi.org/10.1111/jtsb.12134
- Kerlinger, F. N. (1973). Foundations of behavioral research (2nd ed). Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
- Peirce, C. S. (1887). The fixation of belief. Popular Science, 12, 1–15.
- Popper, K. R. (1959). The logic of scientific discovery. University Press.
- Rubin, M. (2017). When does HARKing hurt? Identifying when different types of undisclosed post hoc hypothesizing harm scientific progress. Review of General Psychology, 21, 308–320. https://doi.org/10.1037/gpr0000128