Advancing the Science of Disability Research in Sport and Exercise

The current paper provides suggestions to disability sport and exercise science researchers to improve the quality of their research across 11 key areas. First, I urge researchers to become familiar with the open science movement and, in particular, consider the value of preregistration. Second, I explain researcher degrees of freedom and indicate how many of them are considered questionable research practices and distort the knowledge base. Third, I discuss the value of replication and how questionable research practice, among other reasons, makes replication challenging. Fourth, I advocate for power analyses as small sample sizes can lead to false positives and replication failures. Fifth, reliability and validity evidence should always be reported and should be considered adequate. Strong measurement is also another way to ensure adequately powered studies. Sixth, alpha coefficient is criticized, and alternatives options are offered. Seventh, researchers are reminded to always report, interpret, and discuss effect sizes. Eighth, I review null-hypothesis significance testing (NHST) and p values and attendant criticisms. Ninth, I provide broader suggestions, beyond p -value-linked decisions, to judge research. Tenth, I briefly overview a prior procedure and gain probability analyses as alternatives to traditional NHST approaches, which avoid the many criticisms of NHST. Last, I critically examine the role of reflexivity and positionality statements in qualitative research.