Open science in negotiation research

We illustrate how negotiation research can benefit from implementing Open Science Practices (OSPs). Among these benefits are a less frequent usage of questionable research practices, fewer false positive findings, yet more reproducible and replicable findings. An analysis of negotiation studies published in 2025 (k = 50) documents the current multifaceted state of the negotiation literature: First, whereas studies published in "generalist" journals frequently feature preregistration and shared data, materials, and analysis code, studies published in "specialty" journals are characterized by less usage of such OSPs. This difference likely results from more OSP-supportive journal policies that "generalist" journals introduced in recent years. As such, "specialty" journals could support the usage of OSPs by introducing analogous policies. Second, we observe that negotiation research has largely neglected the potential of independent replications, registered reports, and multiverse analyses. To promote transparency and robustness, negotiation research can embrace specifically these (but also all other) OSPs more.