NIMH RFI to Improve Rigor and Statistical Power in Mental Health Research

The National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), one of the largest supporters of psychological science at the National Institutes of Health, is seeking input on ways to advance rigor, reproducibility, and statistical power in research in mental health and behavioral outcomes.

According to NIMH’s request for information (RFI), the Institute wants to hear from the field “on the issue of statistical power in the context of human subjects research designed to elucidate mechanisms of disease or to develop therapies for mental illness, including but not limited to those studies that employ neuroimaging techniques.”

Areas of particular interest include:

  • Approaches to innovative study designs
  • Solutions to optimize sample size while maintaining feasibility
  • Perceived barriers to submitting adequately powered studies
  • Guidance to applicants to improve rigor in applications
  • Guidance to the peer review process to attend to matters of statistical rigor
  • Solutions to facilitate the generation of clinical results that can be reproducible and advance mental health

To read the full RFI, click here.

Psychological scientists can respond to the RFI via email at [email protected] using the subject “Rigor in Mental Health Research.”

The deadline for responses is August 6, 2017.

To read more about funding agency efforts to improve rigor and reproducibility in behavioral research, check out APS’s December 2016 Observer article “NIH-Wide Policy Doubles Down on Scientific Rigor and Reproducibility.”


APS regularly opens certain online articles for discussion on our website. Effective February 2021, you must be a logged-in APS member to post comments. By posting a comment, you agree to our Community Guidelines and the display of your profile information, including your name and affiliation. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations present in article comments are those of the writers and do not necessarily reflect the views of APS or the article’s author. For more information, please see our Community Guidelines.

Please login with your APS account to comment.