The current debate about how to improve the quality of psychological science revolves, almost exclusively, around the subordinate level of statistical significance testing. In contrast, research design and strict theorizing, which are superordinate to statistics in the methods hierarchy, are sorely neglected. The present article is devoted to the key role assigned to manipulation checks (MCs) for scientific quality control. MCs not only afford a critical test of the premises of hypothesis testing but also (a) prompt clever research design and validity control, (b) carry over to refined theorizing, and (c) have important implications for other facets of methodology, such as replication science. On the basis of an analysis of the reality of MCs reported in current issues of the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, we propose a future methodology for the post–p < .05 era that replaces scrutiny in significance testing with refined validity control and diagnostic research designs.

当前关于如何提高心理科学质量的争论几乎完全围绕统计显着性检验的从属层面展开。相比之下，在方法层次结构中高于统计学的研究设计和严格的理论化被严重忽视。本文致力于分配给科学质量控制的操作检查 (MC) 的关键作用。MC 不仅提供对假设检验前提的批判性检验，而且还 (a) 提示巧妙的研究设计和有效性控制，(b) 延续到精炼的理论，以及 (c) 对方法论的其他方面具有重要意义，例如复制科学。基于对当前《人格与社会心理学杂志》中报道的 MC 现实情况的分析，我们为后p < .05 时代提出了一种未来的方法论，用精炼的有效性控制和诊断研究设计取代显着性检验中的审查。