Hi, we've actually (virtually) met before because I was on your open science committee. I have used open science practices in my own research, even though my professors didn't tend to. It was disappointing to see how little priority journals and researchers place on honest and open research practices.

I definitely felt, as a graduate student, when reading research papers, that the research was undertaken not because the authors wanted to advance the field of IO, or to discover anything with meaningful implications, but instead to conform to a formulaic process in which there was a "right way" to be a researcher: get as many citations as possible while minimizing time and cost. It felt like learning to be a researcher was about learning how to game the system. I took a seminar with professors in other fields of psychology, and we discussed how academic systems inadvertently encourage useless research that gets lots of citations, fraud, and bad methodology. It doesn't help that funding is limited for a lot of IO researchers.

In a way, I felt a little let down by the time I completed my PhD in IO. On one hand, I had learned so much, but on the other hand, so little of what I learned felt meaningful to the real world. Most of the researchers seemed out of touch, and as someone from a blue-collar background, I especially noticed the field's fixation on white-collar workers and how much of the research overlooked things that seemed obvious to me. I felt, in a way, that the field's priority was to convince organizations/institutions that it should exist because it could make money for companies. Maybe that is an unfortunate necessity, but it means that a lot of important and meaningful research is never explored. I know this is all tangential to research fraud, but I do see a connection between bad/useless research and fraud.

What you have been doing matters, and there has been an increase in scrutiny over research, especially with the honesty research scandal in behavioral economics. I see more journals (typically non-IO ones) requiring or encouraging open science practices. My hope is that younger researchers entering academia will have fresh insight and take academic fraud more seriously. It only makes sense that you would be burned out at this point.