Interest in transparent and open science is increasing in special education, school psychology, and related disciplines. Proponents for open science reforms provide evidence that researchers in special education, and the broader social sciences, engage in practices that mitigates its credibility and reduces the validity of information disseminated to practitioners and policymakers. In light of these issues, this article reports on a survey of journal editors-in-chief and associate editors to gain insight into concerns regarding research reproducibility, and the familiarity and viability of open science for improving research credibility. Results indicate that respondents were concerned about research reproducibility, were moderately familiar with open science practices, and viewed many as effective for improving research credibility. Finally, respondents supported the use of journals to encourage open science practices though there was little support for requiring their use. Findings are discussed in relation to open science and implications for research and practice.

特殊教育、学校心理学和相关学科对透明和开放科学的兴趣正在增加。开放科学改革的支持者提供的证据表明，特殊教育和更广泛的社会科学领域的研究人员所从事的实践会降低其可信度并降低传播给从业者和政策制定者的信息的有效性。鉴于这些问题，本文报告了对期刊主编和副主编的调查，以深入了解有关研究可重复性的担忧，以及开放科学的熟悉度和可行性，以提高研究可信度。结果表明，受访者关注研究的可重复性，对开放科学实践有一定程度的熟悉，并认为许多对提高研究可信度是有效的。最后，受访者支持使用期刊来鼓励开放科学实践，尽管几乎没有人支持要求使用期刊。讨论结果与开放科学以及对研究和实践的影响有关。