Short abstract

Questionable research practices threaten scientific integrity, yet remain ill-defined. Using a community consensus method, we identified and categorized 40 QRPs in quantitative research. This taxonomy enhances transparency and helps mitigate QRPs, contributing to research integrity and metascience.

Long abstract

Questionable research practices (QRPs) undermine the credibility of scientific research, yet a comprehensive and structured taxonomy has been lacking. Using a community consensus method, we developed a refined definition of QRPs and systematically identified, categorized, and analyzed 40 QRPs in quantitative psychological research. These QRPs span various stages of the research process, from data collection to publication, and were assessed based on their potential harms, detectability, clues, and possible preventive measures. Our findings highlight the pervasiveness and versatility of QRPs and demonstrate their potential to distort scientific conclusions. By providing a structured framework for recognizing and mitigating QRPs, this work contributes to ongoing efforts in research integrity and transparency. Our Bestiary offers a practical tool for researchers, institutions, and policymakers to improve scientific practices and strengthen metascientific discourse. This talk will discuss key findings, methodological approaches, and implications for the future of open and credible psychological science.