Re-Building Trust

The Replication Crisis diminishes trust in empirical sciences and with it the perceived value of science (Lupia, 2018, 10.1007/978-3-319-54395-6_41). Open Science Practices (i.a. open data, open analysis script, open materials) are an increasingly popular approach to deal with challenges in replication and to rebuilt trust (Geukes et al, 2016, 10.1026/1612-5010/a000167). First investigations could, however, deliver no evidence toward the effect of Open Science Practices (OSP) on trustworthiness (Wingen, Berkessel & Englich, 2019, 10.31219/osf.io/4ukq5). The study investigated the effect on a discipline level (psychology) with an abstract description of OSP. Within the ongoing discussion about incentives for OSP (e.g. badges for OSP), we want to shift the focus from discipline level to concrete individual journal articles and consider epistemic beliefs of readers to play a role (Merk & Rosman, 2018, 10.31219/osf.io/cduqe): Will visible OSP (vs. not visible vs. visibly non-OSP) foster perceived trustworthiness when reading journal articles of empirical studies? Will multiplistic epistemic beliefs moderate the relationship between OSP and trustworthiness?