Scientific research across a number of areas, including applied psychophysiology, biofeedback, and neurofeedback, is facing considerable scrutiny for poor replication rates, high numbers of false-positive findings, and insufficient scientific rigor. There are many factors underlying this replication crisis in scientific research; yet incentives for more rigorous research practices at the institutional and editorial levels lag behind the need for improvement. The author provides examples of replication and rigor difficulties in scientific research with an eye toward psychophysiological research, including researcher flexibility in data analysis, “p-hacking,” insufficient sample sizes, and lack of availability and implementation of rigorous methodological and publication guidelines. Subsequently, the author highlights examples and opportunities for improvement, including decreasing researcher flexibility, reporting sample size information, increasing sample sizes through collaboration, improving reporting standards/following established guidelines for reporting psychophysiological data, and increasing adoption of preregistration and registered reports. The author concludes that the Association for Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback (AAPB) can improve clinical practice and perception of public and scientific credibility by implementing rigorous and transparent research practices with a focus on replicability and clear methodological and reporting techniques and standards.
