Open science practices in behavioral addictions: An exploratory survey

Research output: Contribution to journalResearch articleContributedpeer-review

Contributors

  • Charlotte Eben - , University of British Columbia, University of Cologne (Author)
  • Robert M. Heirene - , University of Sydney (Author)
  • Lucas Palmer - , University of British Columbia (Author)
  • Joël Billieux - , University of Lausanne (Author)
  • Beáta Bőthe - , University of Montreal, Research Center Interdisciplinary Approach to Marital Problems and Sexual Assault (Author)
  • Damien Brevers - , Université catholique de Louvain (Author)
  • Zhang Chen - , Ghent University (Author)
  • Joshua B. Grubbs - , University of New Mexico (Author)
  • Anja Kräplin - , Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy (Author)
  • Karol Lewczuk - , Cardinal Stefan Wyszynski University, University of Gibraltar (Author)
  • Philip Newall - , University of Bristol (Author)
  • José C. Perales - , University of Granada (Author)
  • Jan Peters - , University of Cologne (Author)
  • Ruth J. van Holst - , University of Amsterdam (Author)
  • Luke Clark - , University of British Columbia (Author)

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundThe field of behavioral addictions (BA) research addresses activity domains such as excessive gaming, gambling, and other online behaviors that influence public health policies. A failure to embrace open science practices may lead to concerns about the trustworthiness and reliability of its research outputs. This study explored the current use of open science practices among BA researchers, focusing on the adoption, underlying motivations, concerns, and support needs across seven specific open science practices.MethodsWe distributed an exploratory survey through professional networks, conferences, and social media and received 83 eligible responses (early career researcher [ECRs]: N = 41). The survey covered six domains: general use, frequency, importance, engagement, concerns, and support needs related to open science practices.ResultsMost respondents reported positive attitudes toward open science, with preregistration (75% of total N) and data sharing (65% of total N) as the most commonly used practices. Descriptively, ECRs placed greater importance on these practices than their established counterparts, suggesting a potential generational shift. ECRs primarily reported concerns about insufficient knowledge and fear of errors, while established researchers emphasized workload and a lack of incentives. Both groups highlighted the need for increased time, resources, institutional support, and training.DiscussionAlthough our findings are descriptive and limited by self-selection and sample bias, they offer initial insights into how open science is perceived and practised in the field. Sustained progress requires coordinated action from individuals, institutions, and professional societies in terms of knowledge transfer and incentives to ensure inclusive and equitable adoption of open science practices.

Details

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)183-194
Number of pages12
JournalJournal of behavioral addictions
Volume15
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - Mar 2026
Peer-reviewedYes

External IDs

PubMed 41860605
ORCID /0000-0002-1612-3932/work/215831494

Keywords

Sustainable Development Goals

Keywords

  • behavioral addiction, gambling, gaming, open science, reproducibility