A reflection on open science badges: Valuing methodological integrity and ethics in qualitative research.

This editorial considers the current practice of assigning badges for articles in journals that adhere to the values of open science, irrespective of their methods or epistemological perspectives. Although many virtues of open science exist, I question practices of open science that may support some epistemological approaches to science while devaluing or compromising others. Specifically, I am concerned that unreflective practices marginalize the historical practices endemic to qualitative methods that already serve open science goals and strengthen methodological rigor. As well, I express concerns about prioritizing adherence to open science over a depth of engagement with research ethics. I indicate that how prioritization may disempower communities in the research process and may be especially dangerous for minoritized participants. In a friendly parody of the practice of assigning open science badges, I propose an alternate set of badges for ethical scientific practice to illustrate pathways that can emphasize epistemic pluralism and research ethics. Through this editorial, I point to unresolved problems in the field and encourage open science advocates to address methodological pluralism and its implications for research ethics, social justice practices, and scientific rigor in order to strengthen all of psychological science. The article calls for the acknowledgement of these issues and suggests routes to address them. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved)