Open science practices and new statistics in the Yearbook of Music Psychology: A bibliometric analysis

Open science practices and the use of the so-called new statistics can be understood as countermeasures to the crisis of confidence in psychology criticising questionable research practices. To trace developments toward improved research standards in German and German speaking music psychology research, a bibliometric analysis of research reports published in the Yearbook of Music Psychology (Vol. 22–32, 2012–June 2024) was conducted. Metadata from all articles was extracted and cleaned, and additional variables related to open science and new statistic practices were coded manually. The final dataset included 79 research reports, 59 of which reported quantitative studies. Since Volume 28, most quantitative papers included statements regarding the availability of data and materials, as well as disclosures of funding sources and potential conflicts of interest. However, none of the studies reported a preregistration. Effect sizes and p-values were frequently reported but only around half of the papers included confidence intervals. An international and interdisciplinary comparison revealed similar trends while also identifying areas where practices in the Yearbook were either comparatively high or contained some of the known problems and need improvement. The analysis offers a detailed overview of the evolution of publication practices in the Yearbook over the past decade. By providing empirical insights into the uptake of open science and statistical reporting standards, the study contributes to the ongoing development of both the Yearbook of Music Psychology and the broader field of music psychology. These findings may also inform editorial policies and future research practice more generally. Note: A correction of this article has been posted at https://doi.org/10.25968/opus-3864.